Is it proper to speak of the regional conference system as "segregation"? I don't think so. The regional conferences include Hispanic and Filipino churches. The "white conferences" have black pastors and churches with a majority of black members. So something that started in the days of segregation has continued when that reason--and that reality--is gone. Talking about "segregation" only gets in the way of asking what really is going on. I don't have an answer to that question ... I would like to hear from some who might.

When I became an Adventist about 9 years ago, I thought it was odd when I read about 'Spanish' and 'Korean' churches.  We have members of all races at our small church but we all speak English and can understand the pastor and each other.  If the service was to be in a language other then English, I can see the reason for letting people know the common language they will be need to understand if they are to take part. Other than that, however, I don't think I've seen a 'Black' or 'White' or whatever church.  In the South I've attended churches where most of the membership was black but as a white guy I was made to feel right at home.  At our little church, we don't care what color you are, we are just so glad to see someone new :-)  I know in some areas, mistrust and even hatred between ALL the races is so thick you can cut it with a knife, but I would be sad to ever see that in one of our churches.

SJHall

Bill,

Segregation by its very definition is separation based on race--regardless of whether those races are black, white, Hispanic, or Filipino.  The notion that white churches are usually pastored by black leaders, with black congregations, is incorrect.  Your mention of Hispanic and Filipino churches only confirms this.  If Adventists were already wholly mixed in their interactions, such divisions would not exist.  Also, stating that our church's current organizational structure was started in the days of segregation suggests that we are willing to condone our own behavior and refuse to make amendments.  We shouldn't.

When you say that talking about segregation gets in the way of addressing "what is really going on," I am curious to know what you mean by that statement.  Since this blog is talking about the possibility of thwarted interracial relationships in the church, isn't addressing the segregated organizational structure of the church integral?

Shayna Bailey

Staff Blogger, Adventist Today 

SJHall,

You are fortunate that you have never experienced tangible in racism in any of your churches, but I assure you, it is there.  You say that you have never seen a "black" or "white" church, but then state that the church you attended was primarily black.  Have you chosen not to count that in your list of experiences?

I think it's great that you were made to feel right at home as an ethnic minority in church, but the question this blog was asking was whether or not interracial relationships are able to flourish in racially homogenous churches.  Even if you had chosen to date or marry someone of a different ethnicity, wouldn't the majority of couples in such a church still be same-race? 

Shayna Bailey

Staff Blogger, Adventist Today 

"The notion that white churches are usually pastored by black leaders, with black congregations, is incorrect. "

I did not say that. I said there are black pastors in "white conferences," and churches in "white conferences" that are black. My own church has a Hispanic senior pastor, and white, black, and Vietnamese associates. It is made up of people from 50 different nationalities. Adventism is quickly becoming a brown-skinned church. I see no shortage of intermarriage.

The call for acceptance of those who differ from us is noble and is something we should all strive for.   The premise, however, to get to this point is rather flawed. To state that  "church still openly practices segregation  between its conferences"  is misleading at best or a gross exaggeration at worst. 

I am departmental director in a "regional" conference who visits a different church almost every week.   I have never seen a sign posted in any of our churches barring anyone on the basis of race.  The fact that I belong to a conference which is historically black does not make me a segregationist. Furthermore,  when I look into the faces of my constituents I see a rainbow from Heaven's kaleidoscope looking back at me. 

I have, from time to time, accepted invitations to preach or lead seminars in churches belonging to sister conferences.  Each time I have felt welcomed and have been blessed to worship with God's people regardless of race. They ideal integrated Church will not seek unity by denying its diversity but  rather by celebrating it.

Bill and Dan,

Your observations are that many churches, regardless of union affiliation, are comprised of multiple races.  However, noting mixture at the individual church level still fails to negate the fact that race-based division still exists at the organizational level.  Regardless of one's choice, from week to week, on which church to attend, what does race-based division at a higher level say about the practices of members who comprise and participate in the organization of that structure?  Dan, what better way for the ideal integrated church to celebrate its diversity than by abolishing race-based division?  

Shayna Bailey

Staff Blogger, Adventist Today 

Dan,

With all due respect to your "regional" directorship, you're missing the point. The issue is not racist segregation due to one's skin color, but the choice of a denomination to not treat a systemic dysfunction that is "race based" conferences. But don't take my word for it....

Pastor Fredrick Russell, who pastored the Miracle Temple Seventh-day Adventist Church in Baltimore, and is now Allegheny West Conference President said it best in his Adventist Today article:

"What we believe about ourselves and what we practice are inconsistent. This is played out most clearly in the official validation of a race-based organizational structure that continues to exist into the 21st century.

The irony is that even as the wider, secular culture has moved to dismantle any and all organizational structures that reflected government-sanctioned racial division in American history, the Seventh-day Adventist Church has “doubled down” on keeping a racially segregated infrastructure in place. Many Adventists in America are not even aware that this structural condition exists—and certainly not aware of how it came about that the vast majority of the 58 conferences in the North American Division are racially segregated at their core"

Shayna hits it home. Race-based divisions, which continue to foster segregation, needs to be abolished. You can voice your opinion in favor of such action by signing the petition.

Marcel Schwantes

Online Editor, Adventist Today

Thanks, Shayna, for another excellent blog.  My son grew up in the "mission field," so I would not be suprised at all for his home to be international/bi-cultural.  In fact, I am looking forward to that possibility!  I agree that there is an observable message about the Kingdom in a mixed-church and a mixed-home.  I would like to point out, however, that to insist on only "mixed" churches is actually one form of monoethnic thinking. I have some beautiful, close Filipino friends in the USA.  I sense no divide between us.  However, I can understand the need for them to worship--at least at times--in a cultural setting comfortable for them.  I love my Pakistani and Filipino friends who were my neighbors when I lived in their countries.  We did many things together, including Sabbath worship.  But in spite of all of the things I learned from them (and I trust I am a better man for it), there were times that it just felt good to worship with a group from my culture.  I think the reality of this is especially true for evangelism and the new Christian.  In other words, all cultures are as good as mine; and I want them not to have to blend into my "melting pot" in order to worship!  What would the world be like if all our churches looked alike--inside and out!

Isn't it interesting that when white, western missionaries get together in a foreign country, it is just fellowship with friends from back home, but when those who are not white and are in 1st world countries do the same, it is a "racially segregated" meeting.  Perhaps it is not just the organizational structure but our perspectives that need to change.

God bless,

Steve Terry 

 

Segregation is defined as the enforced separation of different racial groups. While this used to be the case even in the Adventist church, it so no longer. So I agree that the choice of word was perhaps not the best, and the sentence that we "openly practice segregation" is simply incorrect (because we don't--we separate, often, but don't segregate, any more). The question should rather be, do separate church structures (i.e. conferences) keep groups of (young) people apart, so they cannot form relationships/marriages.

I (white) met my wife (black) in the South of England, where there is only one conference, but where most churches in the urban areas are black, and where many churches in the rural areas are white. Camp Meeting, summer camps, retreats, days of fellowship etc can still be fairly mono-chromatic affairs. In the end it is not so much church administration, but the church members and pastors on the grassroots level that decide whether to spend more time together or not. 

When last did you hear of a church belonging to a state conference and a church from a regional conference, both in the same town, partner up to plan events together, have their young people do programmes together, have their pastors preach in each other's church?

And so I agree with the last two paragraphs...

Stefan Burton-Schnüll
Pastor, Bermuda Conference (Atlantic Union)

Ella M

I agree with your blog, and I am not of the younger generation. It's up to them to see that this separatism does not continue, but that we have equal access to one another.  Regional conferences and churches have been a barrier to members getting to know one another. 

Thankfully most or many of our churches are integrated, and this helps.   It seems only among the youth that barriers are breaking down when it comes to friendship and marriage.  I wish my generation had been as open and tolerant. 

I hope that more people will recognize that our president is the child of such a marriage.

It seems to this reader that it is definitely wise to differentiate based on race when choosing a mate. I'm unaware of any ethical principle that dictates otherwise.

OTOH should a person choose to do otherwise he should not be condemned or ostracized for making an unwise decision.

 

 

Truth Seeker

I'm unaware of any ethical prinicple that says it's wise to differentiate one's future spouse based on so-called "race". There are historical reasons, left-overs of foolish paradigms of the past, that may lead some readers, including the previous one, to believe it to be wisdom.

I think it's tosh -- and, Truth Seeker, are you calling me "unwise"??

Stefan

Our first priority should not be to encourage mixed ethnicity marriages. But, to have unity of the races, so the children of mixed ethnic marrriages do not have bad experiences. Are we there, when we can safely dimantle Regional confernece churches or will hatred, jealousy and discord be the order of the day.

I asked my wife tonight, isn't it ok for an irishman to want to marry an Irsih lady,  or  a filopino  to want to keep their cultural characteristics. What of Koreans, what is wrong with  a Korean wanting a Korean spouse..

Shyna, you are speaking form a Black perspective. There are many examples of famous light skinned actresses, like Halle Berry that some want to emmulate or have their kids emulate. Is that not a form of racism in itself.

Don't start from the premise of interracial marriage, solve the ethnic problems that still divide us. Let's get the schools of our intercity performing so States don't have to run them because of broken marriages, that put the children at a disadvantage  and may put him or her on the path to poverty, crime and jail.

What are the issues that started Regional Churches, what are the issues in dismantling them. I propose, that those issues will be the same that will cause hardship in Interracial marriages. Let's get busy and dismantle the Regional Churches if we're ready to.

 Regards, Douglas

Douglas,

You seem to have a knack for turning Shayna's blogs into your own projections about race and race relations. Not to mention, once again, you mistakenly label Shayna, because of her dark pigment, as "black," (African-American) when she is in fact of Caribbean descent. As Shayna stated to you in another comment, she speaks from a perspective of being neither black nor white. No racial overtone should be applied. It is a case for practicing more openly racial homogeneity.

If you want to solve the ethnic problems that still divide, perhaps we should all take Shayna's counsel--branch out and mix with those outside our own ethnic circles. I understand that may be difficult in some parts of white middle America. But, Douglas, discouraging mixed ethnic marriages from happening, as you stated, is a suspicious comment and headed the opposite direction toward racial unity.

Marcel Schwantes

Online Editor, Adventist Today

Marcel,

Our main objective should not be to increase inter racial marriages. There is nothing wrong with that, if we have the problems solved between the races in question, which should be our main priority. The SDA church with their Regional Conferences haven't solved these problems. Why would you want more mixed race marriages as long as you haven't solved the race problem. Children brought into this situation are hurt, can the parents protect the little ones at all time, because of their choice.

Your suggestion of my intent is wrong, and you need to adjust your thinking, the main priority on this matter is not "racial homogeneity", to create a brown race, but to solve the problems of the races before we start mixing them as a priority.

Regards, Douglas

Marcel,

Also, when two white kids get married we suggest marriage counselling, don't we. Well, add race to the picture and I suggest racial counselling, so someone deeply black and deeply white can tell the participants what they will expect with this union.

By the way I'm not White, I'm Canadian American, or of Canadian descent. If I am perceived to be White, aren't I White for all intents and purposes, perception becoming reality???

Regards, Douglas

Here is an interesting story pre-Regional Conferences of a guy named James K. Humphrey's. Have we figured out if we are now able to dismantle Regional Conferences without a racial flareup? If so I'm for it. Let lovers make their own minds up about their own unions though.

http://www.upress.state.ms.us/books/850

 

Regards, Douglas

Douglas,

I sense from your last comment about your Canadian heritage that my own race is somehow of critical importance to your understanding of this blog. Although it is neither any of your business nor integral to any statements I made, Marcel's clarification I am speaking from neither a black nor white perspective is correct.  My parents are of Caribbean descent and ethnically, I am Indian--not black. 

Regarding your other statements, many seem narrow-minded and contradictory.  Your own case example about Halle Berry illustrates this.  Halle Berry is not a "light skinned" black woman, she is a bi-racial, half-white, half-black woman.  Thus, she is a product of the mixed ethnicity marriage you are advocating so hard against.  You claim that children of mixed ethnicity marriages have "bad experiences," yet you used one such child (Ms. Berry) as an example of someone black parents want their children to emulate.  Who says that children of mixed ethnicity marriages have bad experiences? 

Also, what exactly are the "race" problems that each race needs to fix among itself before mixing? Your statements about the "inner city" seem to suggest that these problems are "broken marriages," which lead to "poverty, crime, and jail."  Also, because you specifically mention "inner cities," I presume you believe that these "race problems" are "black race problems."  Not only are these suggestions ignorant, but they are disturbingly misleading.  Having lived in an inner city and being a product of a "broken marriage," I have never lived in poverty, turned to a life of crime, or been incarcerated--despite being raised by a single mother.

Your objection to this particular blog seems to be that you do not support a homogenized, brown race.  I suggest again, as I often do, that you reread the last two paragraphs of the blog.  Here, you will find the main intent of the blog--that as Christians, we need to change our interactions with each other, de-emphasize race in our dating decisions, and focus on seeking spiritual unity above racial unity.

Shayna Bailey

Staff Blogger, Adventist Today 

TruthSeeker,

The second to last paragraph of this blog illustrates not only an ethical, but a biblical, principle that dictates against choosing a mate based on race. 

Shayna Bailey

Staff Blogger, Adventist Today 

Shayna read these statistics on Black on White crime and then tell me we still don't have a problem

. http://www.racismeantiblanc.bizland.com/005/06-02.htm

My comment about being Canadian Americian is to  point out that people assume I am a White American, and I have to check the white causcasian box on applications. Perception probably has you as American Black, which box do you check. Indian is not a protected class except Native American. Do you check the Caucasian box or Black box. If checked for you, they would probably check black. That was my point. You are still speaking from a bias, one way or the other.  

Regards, Douglas

One of the big—albeit usually avoided—issues is white denial. We white people prefer to refer to ourselves by nationality instead of "white", although it was our ancestors who created that whole "race" system, and we have reaped benefits based on that "whiteness".

This article, from which we have somewhat deviated, brought out an interesting question, whether separate conference structures limit interracial relationships. Do structures affect our preferences and limit our movements? Structures are only as effective as the adherence of the masses to them. If somebody wants to cross lines, let them do so, and let us applaud him and her. The more interracial relationships we have, the better.

Stefan

Shayna,

If you believe what you said about Halle Berry, then why the fuss at the ceremony, why the crying and talking about all those she represented that night. She was talking to Black women, not white women. Some Black's didn't think she was Black enough to represent them. That shows the division still. Just like the way some feel about Obama. 

 http://www.theinsider.com/news/1569853_President_Obama_isn_t_black_enough

 http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/04/sunday/main2534119.shtml

Regards, Douglas

Douglas, do you blame Black people for the division? What does Halle Berry have to do with the topic at hand?

Do you actually believe that Black Adventists think Halle Berry or President Obama are not Black enough? Do you suggest it's the Regional Conferences that hold back the unity we strive for?

I would be very grateful to stand to be corrected... because, honestly, your posts begin to worry me a bit.

Stefan, you haven't read back far enough I guess because Marcel was talking about Racial Homogenity, a Brown Race, that is not our priority. The division of Regional Conferences is because the Blacks want power. D.C. is a good example. If it become part of Maryland the blacks become deluted. if Regional Conferences are eliminated, it's not as easy for a Black to get a job. That is my point. The premise of this Blog was to increase mixed race marriages and was the split hammering that, it you go back and read the article. You can be worried if you want but that is what the article starte out to be rather than figure out what caused the fracture in the first place and is that solved now.

 

Regards, Douglas

Deleted by moderator.

Well... I agree with the article, in that we should support—both locally and on conference levels—mixed marriages. Encourage them and respect them. And let their kids mess up our neat "black/white" world. May they grow up fast, and get elected as administrators of ANY conference :-)

Finally, I think the statement that Black conferences are just about feeding Black power is insulting my friends and colleagues in the Regional work. If it was not for white bigotry in the first place, there would not have been the need for Regional conferences.

Douglas,

I hope you are not an Adventist, as I would be sad to be associated with you, given your comments.

The Bible says:

“After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.”-Revelation 7:9-10

Bottom line is that there will not only be whites in heaven, and that I, someone from Asian decent (not black, even though I am not white), will be there, along with black people, and other “colored” people.  GOD tells us that people from ALL races will be in Heaven, and that there will be no separation of people.  Why not eliminate the separation now in our church organization by eliminating race based conferences?

As for inter-racial dating and marrying, it would be easier if multiple races were co-mingled in more churches.  However, that is not the primary objective behind eliminating segregation in the organization of our church.  The primary reason for eliminating segregation would be to prepare for Heaven, where there will be none of that!

If you cannot get on board with that, then Heaven may not be the right place for you!

The Moderator deleted my last post or you might understand why there may be no desire to increase mixed races. That as I said before should not be our main priority but why the races are not getting along. Note the statistics I supplied Shayna about Black on White crime. Mixing the races is not the answer, Jesus dwelling within all races is.

 Regards, Douglas

I hope that new readers of this blog and comments won't forget Shayna's main objective--"last 2 paragraphs" as she reminds us.  There still is racial/ethnic bias in our church; we are humans.   Our growth in Christ should be erasing that to the extent possible on this side of Jordan. 

Douglas, do the crime stats you have referred to, or any other point you have made, have any relevance to racially integrated churches and church structures or/and interracial marriages? Are you actually suggesting that my black wife is more likely to mug instead of hug me, her white husband, because that's what those stats suggest (black on white crime)? Or that my black congregation is waiting outside the church to beat up their white pastor (black on white crime)?? Please!

If you don't agree with mixing, fine, stay in your unicoloured corner with the rest of the separatists and their websites and crime stats, while the mature rest of us works towards a church design and make-up that is closer to what God has intended. Thank God, He is bigger than crime stats. Where those abound, grace much more abounds...

Thanks, Lester for bringing the focus back to the main point. The closing two paragraphs of the article sum it up pretty well. If we live and work side by side, we ought to worship side by side too. And where romance blossoms across the lines, water and protect it.

Stefan, the church is to serve the world, once you and your black wife step out the door of your house or of the church, you are facing those stats like it or not. The objective is not a brown race but to save people. If the initial impression is such they don't want to listen to you, your minististry will fail. To mix the races is not going to solve the Regional Conference issue, in fact the reverse is the way and safer for those involved. You are serviving in Bermuda as I recall. That may be safer than downtown St. Louis, with carjackings and drive by shootings. The trouble with the SDA church is they want a cocoon to worship in, and thenwhen they go to share their faith..... Oh, we're suppose to do that, ....in the world.... where those stats mean something????

Regards, Douglas

Douglas,

Contrary to your suggestion in your last comment, it is NOT people ("if they don't want to listen to you, your ministry will fail"), but the HOLY SPIRIT (John 6:8-11, John 14:6, 16, 17) that saves people.  Also, the intention of this blog was NOT to advocate the creation of a homogenized, brown race, but to encourage us all to not let race be a limiting factor when making relationship decisions.

Not only have the majority of your comments NOT been directly related to the message of this blog, but your accusations about other races have now progressed from misguided to outright racist and offensive. Adventist Today is absolutely NOT the correct forum for posting openly racist articles from hate groups.  This is the reason your last link to such a site was deleted.  Because your statements are in violation of the Adventist Today comment policy (seen directly above the comment box), this is your official warning that racist, bigoted, sexist, or otherwise offensive personal comments about others cannot be tolerated.  You should have received an email already from the online editor regarding this decision and the terms of your continued membership to this site.  If you have questions pertaining to this decision, please email the online editor, Marcel Schwantes, at atoday@atoday.com.

 

Shayna Bailey

Staff Blogger, Adventist Today 

Thanks Shayna. Well said. A warning by email has been sent to user "Douglas." 

Marcel - Online Editor, Adventist Today

Marcel and Shayna, Though implied by post and email that I am against interracial marriage, I am not, but the title of this post, has the cart before the horse. If we are cowards in discussions of race as suggested by our current Attorney General, and have to warn people of imagined steps over imaginary lines, then we have more problems in the Adventist Church regarding race than discussed above.

Since Marcel has not responded to my request of his above referenced post, I will give the allegation and let those on line determine if Marcel and Shayna have drawn the correct conclusions about the discussion and my belief.

Marcel stated that my comments "have bordered on racist, bigoted, and sexist remarks".  I differ and have asked for an example. I know Shayna above has suggested that I oppose interracial marriage which is a false accusation, and I would like an apology.

Shayna, you are about to enter study to be a doctor. Your skin needs a little thinken before you enter that course. It's tough and demanding, and people will make remarks that you will have to be clear about. Why not start now.

My final comment, interracial marriages will not cure the SDA church's racial problems. I have no hurts that I am airing as suggested by Shayna. But at Andrews University when I attended, there was a self-segregation, not required but self imposed by individuals, for their own comfort, I assume. But in the cafeteria, that self segregation was very evident, to suggest the officials of the SDA church are responsible for it, is being a coward in the discussion of race relations in our denomination.

Regards, Douglas

Douglas, of course I face statistics whenever I leave the house. Good grief, I face them every time I use the bathroom (how many accidents happen in that room, statistically speaking). But your obsession with stats in the world, outside the church, is missing the point, because we're not talking about "outside". Furthermore, it distracts your attention from the fact that the gospel of Jesus BRINGS PEOPLE TOGETHER.

Regional Conferences came out of a real need, caused by White (let me spell it out: people like you and me) discrimination. However, these structures must not become an excuse for separation. If the "world" seems to move closer together, how much more should those that claim to be no longer of it. If the "world" is still a dangerous place, how much more do they need to hear the gospel, from .... uh... that would be US (you and me!). We (white folk) must not use separate conference structures to say that's "their" (black folk's) territory. If you live in St Louis, both downtown, and suburbia is YOUR mission field (not that of the "other" Adventists). You live in America? That's your mission field. I live in Bermuda. That's mine--the whole island.

With "initial impression" do you mean black folk won't listen to you, white guy, and so your ministry is ineffective? (Or, are you suggesting my "brown" daughter won't be an effective witness??)
Do you love lost people? If yes, it will show, no matter who you meet--Regional or not... (learning some Black history helps too)

And if coming together means more "brown" babies, good! And if it means black and white kids playing together in church, while their parents form part of a genuine community of faith, good! Of course, not everybody has to marry someone different. But we cannot use adminstrative structures as a reason, or excuse, to remain separate.

We cannot afford to have a form of godliness, but deny its power (to unite).

Peace and Love
Stefan
Pastor, Bermuda Conference (part of the Atlantic Union)

I didn't see that last post, Douglas, until I after I posted my earlier reply.

You are correct, we are a church of cowards (to phrase it with Att Gen Holder). But that, or experiences at Andrews, cannot be used to hold us back. We have to address race relations in the NAD. And with the gospel of Jesus Christ as our foundation, we have little to be afraid of. In fact, that is the best remedy for "cowardice".

Finally, calling for an official apology from Shayna makes me wonder exactly who's skin may need to thicken a little
At least you clarified your stand on mixed marriages, which I actually thought you were against, (so I can take you off my "special list".... -- that's a joke btw, just in case)

Peace
stefan