INTRODUCTION
A recent visitor to the Mid-south exclaimed, “Memphis is one of the most racist city ever! I knew of people that hated one another, but nothing like how I feel when we drive around in this dump!” Those comments were not made fifty years ago. They were made in August of 2011. When a Black man walks into a white church in Memphis, many in the congregation obviously feel uncomfortable or even fearful. Others look as if they are clinging to their wallets, hoping he will not be asked for money, gas, or help paying the utility bill. I grew up here, in this city. Though the Civil Rights Movement had impacted many areas of Southern life, it takes more than a social movement to change attitudes. The general attitude of “Whites hate Blacks and vice versa” is still unchanged in my hometown. My personal feelings concerning Blacks was shaded by growing up in this culture. No, we did not have “For Whites Only” signs on our church doors, but at least if we did, we would have saved the Black man the stares and our churches, and Christ for that matter, the embarrassment of being racist. After graduating from high school, I attended Clearwater Christian College. The culture in Florida is significantly different from Memphis. Whites, Blacks, Hispanics and Asians all lived in relative harmony. There was little, if any, racial discord when a Black man walked into the church I attended. In fact, there were four mixed-race couples in our church that held significant roles in the lay leadership. Many other members were Black. This offered a stark contrast to my ideas of race I had developed. My own personal “racism” was challenged by other students and professors through my education there. I had come to a pivotal point in my life. Was I going to continue in the tradition of undercover racism that permeated my life thus far, or would I truly embrace Blacks as a people worthy of respect, love, and sacrifice? Last year, my wife and I visited the National Civil Rights Museum. My eyes began to open to the oppression Blacks had historically undergone in the South. My grandparents have talked of when Martin Luther King, Jr. died, but I never understood who he was or what he had accomplished in the Civil Rights Movement of the 50s and 60s until that day. Martin Luther King, Jr. was not only a Civil Rights leader, but also a minister. Therefore, there are lessons I could personally learn and incorporate into my personal ministry. Being human, there are things King did that I could also learn to avoid. I have made it the endeavor of this project to procure three specific goals. First, understand Martin Luther King, Jr. for who he was, not what I had heard growing up. Second, to comprehend the forces that influenced him and apply them to my leadership. Finally, to interpret his life in such a way that Christian leaders who read this project can be shaped by the positives of his legacy. Seeing as I am seeking a Master of Christian Education degree, it is essential that I understand the educational forces at work in the life of Martin Luther King, Jr. Only then can a directed approach of synthesizing his life into my ministry be possible. Though not focusing on Martin’s life accomplishments, I have found it more important to know why, rather than when and how when considering persons of Church history. Thus, this particular approach allows for a better application to life, rather than mere academic inquiry. Through analysis of his development and influences, one can understand that Martin Luther King, Jr., embodies a great leader, visionary, and dreamer; yet could his legacy been even greater than the one he has left for us?
DEVELOPMENT OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.
Early Life, 1929-1944
Martin Luther King, Jr., originally Michael rather than Martin, was born January 15, 1929. He was born to Martin Luther King, Sr. and Alberta Williams of 501 Auburn Avenue, Atlanta Georgia. Martin’s early life was one of normalcy. His neighborhood was one of average income, with a relatively low crime rate. Martin’s home life was loving, kind, and invigorating. His father was an accomplished Baptist minister and a leader in the community. Martin Sr. is noted as being a brave, demanding figure. When he spoke, people listened. On the other hand, Martin’s mother was laid back, yet prepared the King children for the realities of segregation and discrimination in the hometown of Atlanta. Both Martin’s mother and father were principled Christians. They lived a life of faith which certainly influenced Martin towards his life’s calling. Coming from a long line of Black ministers, Martin had the pedigree of a leader. Ministers can be found in his family line back to his great-grandfather. Most had leadership roles denominationally, not just in local church capacities. Though Martin grew up in a caring family life with little economic hardship, his eyes were not blinded to the issues of segregation. His first confrontation with race issues came when he began to loose friendship with a White boy of similar age. They had played together before they entered school. Soon after starting school, the two young boys played together less, and lost daily contact. The relationship faded gradually. One day, the White boy’s father ordered that he no longer play with Martin. Martin immediately asked his father and mother why such a rule was necessary. They only explained how they too had suffered because of even worse actions in their lives. Martin, Sr., once even witnessed a Black man being lynched. Martin’s parents explained that Christian love constrained little Martin to love people regardless. This moment fomented in Martin a hatred for Whites. Martin’s church life consisted of fundamentalist Christian ideology. At age thirteen, Martin openly questioned the doctrine of the bodily resurrection of Christ in a Sunday school class. Not being supplied a sufficient answer, “doubts began to spring forth unrelentingly.” Martin makes it clear that he never had a specific conversion experience. The teachings of Christianity, specifically the moral and philosophical ones, were something that came over time as a result of his surroundings.
The College Years, 1944-1948
Martin began collegiate studies at Morehouse College at age 15. Morehouse College originated as Augusta Baptist Institute in 1867. The historically Black college was originally intended to equip young Black men to be preachers to the recently emancipated slaves. While at Morehouse, Martin endeavored to have a rather eclectic college experience. He played basketball at the YMCA, was member of both the debate team and glee club, and president of the sociology club. One of his most significant college activities was work with the Intercollegiate Council. It was here that Martin began to collaborate with White students. This changed his previous hatred of all Whites to a realization that change was possible through cooperation and trust. The freshman and sophomore years of college are the most illuminating about Martin’s future study. It is at this time Martin was freed from, “the shackles of fundamentalism.” From this point, Martin associates himself with liberal theologians. Martin abandoned the doctrines of “biblical inerrancy, the virgin birth, and the idea of a literal hell, [although] he never questioned the necessity and efficacy of prayer and praying.”Though espousing liberal views of many main doctrines, Martin, somewhat strangely, sought the help and guidance of a personal God. Martin always held that prayer was actual, and effective.
Seminary Days, 1948-1951
After graduating from Morehouse, Martin continued his education at Crozer Theological Seminary. It is here that he sought for the pragmatic solutions to the societal issues of the Black man in America. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s first gleaning from his seminary education was that of the social gospel. Healing came not only through spiritual means, but through healing oppression and economic evil. Religion must not only address the soul, but the society in which it finds itself. Often, this was the only goal of the social gospel. Another derivative of the education at Crozer concerns the ideologies of Marxism and Capitalism. Martin understood Marxism to have several negative aspects. Martin disagreed with Marxism’s lack of spiritual depth. By relying on purely materialistic means of understanding, one looses the “ground and essence of all reality- a power that cannot be explained in materialistic terms.” Stemming from the previous disagreement, Martin found the moral relativism of Marx lacking. “Constructive ends can never give absolute moral justification to destructive means, because in the final analysis the end is preexistent in the means.” To Martin, another questionable feature of Marx ideology is the lack of individual freedom. By making man into a piece of the government conglomeration of society, mankind finds no means of expression, personally or in community. In essence, man becomes a “thing.” As a whole, Martin saw Marxism as evil. When compared to Capitalism, Marxism is evil; but Capitalism is not an end in itself. According to Martin, Capitalism does not take into account the power of the community. Transformation of society for the good is left behind for individual gain and wealth. Martin saw Christianity as a vehicle through which societal ills could be eradicated, with government’s role somewhere between pure Marxism and pure Capitalism. Yet another take away from Martin’s seminary days deals with the introduction to Gandhi. After hearing the president of Howard University, Dr. Mordecai Johnson, speak concerning a recent journey to India, Martin found himself consumed in Gandhi, especially his presentation of nonviolent resistance. In Martin’s thinking, the ideas of “turn the other cheek” and “love your enemies” applied to individual relationship, but not to the great task of desegregating a nation. “Gandhi was probably the first person in history to lift the love ethic of Jesus above mere interaction between individuals to a powerful and effective social force on a large scale.” Without Gandhi, there never would have been desegregation in the United States. Gandhi was the vehicle in permanently changing Martin Luther King, Jr. from a White-man hating six year old boy to the passionate love-based revolutionary he has become known for. The final ideology installed into Martin during his time at Crozer is his understanding of mankind. Though finding freedom from fundamentalism in his new liberal surroundings, Martin took issue with the liberal understanding of man. Martin could not find that man was naturally good. That did not correspond to the segregation and racism he experienced as a child. Therefore, some other view had to incorporated into theological and philosophical system. Though Martin toyed with the neo-orthodox view of mankind, he found it, or any other more conservative view of mankind, to be insufficient to account for the good that was in people world-wide, regardless of religious or cultural setting. Martin found himself somewhere between man being innately good and man being pure evil. There was something in mankind that screamed for truth, yet evil was a definite reality.
Boston University, 1951-1955
Boston University had a special place in Martin’s heart because of one of his professors from Crozer, Raymond Bean. Bean’s influence on Martin led him to attend Bean’s alma mater. Martin’s main area of study was in the philosophy of personalism. Professors such as Brightman and DeWolf influenced Martin to understand God as personality, and people as identified with individual personality. It is through this that all mankind has relationship with each other and with the Divine. This follows with the ideas Martin gleaned in his seminary days. Martin experienced God through prayer, and saw prayer as necessary part of human experience. It is his views of personality developed at this time that influenced the prayer life. This prayer life fed the oratorical machine that was Martin Luther King, Jr. King often prayed during his speeches and sermons. He understood it as the power source for God to enact social change through himself. Martin expressed man as a three-fold being. to be complete man must satisfy the inner man, the needs of others, and the need for communion with God. Man is not complete without communion with the Almighty. It is no doubt that the personal, inner life of Martin, as well as his understanding of God, was shaped by personalism.
ANALYSIS OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.’S
DEVELOPMENT AND IMPACT
Theological Origins
Martin Luther King, Jr.’s cultural setting played a tremendous part of his development theologically. Theologically, Martin grew up under what he terms as “fundamentalism.” Fundamentalism seeks to maintain the central doctrines of orthodox Christianity. Positives that translated into Martin’s life from the Fundamentalist movement are: 1) Prayer- personal communication with the God of the universe, 2) Truth- truth was attainable and based upon principles found in the Bible, and 3) Respect- respect of the family unit and of God. Martin would not have been the leader he was without prayer. Whether his prayers were true communication with the Lord or personal meditation and focused energy can certainly be debated. Either case, Martin took prayer as a personal practice daily and openly. For Martin, truth was not something to be learned. It was revealed. Revealed in he Bible. Though he did away with the doctrine of inerrancy, Martin found the principles of Scripture as unchanging truths that transcend time. Martin saw the family as the basic unit of society. No doubt, he exercised this in his personal family but also saw the family, church, and community as necessary to develop a truly transformed society. Negatives from Martin’s experience with Fundamentalism are numerous. For himself personally, it was not intellectual enough. Seeing that most Black ministers did not attain to higher education influenced him greatly to seek that challenge at any cost. Growing up in a Fundamental Baptist church myself, I felt this similar struggle within as well. As I look to the outside world, many influential men and women are well educated, but most of the ministers I knew had only a bachelors degree, if that. I had considered breaking from my fundamental roots just as Martin had. So I can certainly understand why Martin would do what he did. But who’s fault is it that Fundamentalism was not intellectually stimulating to Martin? As a movement, Fundamentalism has lost much of its intellectual grounding over the past fifty years. This has resulted in a less educated clergy. Less educated clergy lead to a less educated congregation. Less educated congregations lead to Sunday school teachers that can not challenge and accurately guide young students through formative years. Such was the case with Martin. Overall, Martin was very much influenced by those years at home with a Fundamental church. Many of the holdovers from Fundamentalism are seen in his development and are kept by Martin through his entire life. These were a framework for much of his framework of personal religion and lifestyle.
Can I have Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Impact?
Martin’s departure from Fundamentalism signals something to those in the movement, then and today. It is necessary to earn education and maintain a high intellectual standard for those in ministry. It must also be a priority to educate the congregations we serve. If a Sunday school teacher in Martin’s class would have intelligently answered a young man’s doubts about the bodily resurrection, maybe we would see a very different Martin Luther King, Jr., legacy than what we currently have? Along the same lines, why was Martin allowed to join the church without ever having made any profession of faith? Could a injunction by a trained deacon or teacher have saved Martin from the picture of being a church member without true regeneration? This not only speaks harshly of the Fundamentalism of that time, and quite frankly today, but it speaks even more to the fact that many Black churches today are not Fundamental at all. Though they may have been immediately after emancipation and early in the 1900s, most are now liberal theologically. Could this have been avoided by better education of the Black minister population and also by White church leaders becoming more involved in the Civil Rights movement? Looking back, churches should seek to improve others not only theologically through education, but also through social means. I firmly believe Martin Luther King, Jr., could have easily been a theological conservative, as well as saved many Black churches across the South from becoming theologically liberal in persuasion if churches would have reacted in love towards our Black brethren.
As a Christian educator, I must seek to be an example against the very arguments brought to Fundamentalism in Martin’s day. By emulating the positive aspects of the great leader that is Martin Luther King, Jr., I can be a part of God’s plan and help guide those I minister to to remain faithful to God and yet conquer the social issues of our day. Martin once said:
“Unless the early sacrificial spirit is recaptured, I am very much afraid that today’s Christian church will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and we will see the Christian church dismissed as a social club with no meaning or effectiveness for our time, as a form without substance, as salt without savor. The real tragedy, though, is not Martin Luther King’s disillusionment with the church- for I am sustained by its spiritual blessings as a minister of the gospel with a lifelong commitment; the tragedy is that in my travels, I meet young people of all races whose disenchantment with the church has soured into outright disgust.”
I am afraid we are seeing the fruits of this prediction coming true today. However, I believe that Christian leaders can help stem the tide of disgust of the nations for truth by exhibiting some of the virtues that Martin Luther King, Jr., displayed. One of the areas of interest is that of non-violence. Gandhi was Martin’s source of this ideology. Gandhi was not unfamiliar with Christianity, he just never saw it lived as Christ described it in the Sermon on the Mount. Gandhi saw very few Christians that lived out the truth found in it. Gandhi rejected Jesus, but made it clear that the Sermon on the Mount was how the Christian life was to be lived if Christianity was to survive itself. Martin saw Gandhi living out the truth of the Sermon on the Mount. Martin tried to emulate it. However, how many Christians that I know live it? Do I live it? A life of so-called “peace” has been lived by many. But Christian leaders must learn to live in true peace, through the Love of God, that flows from the adoration of the Lord Jesus Christ. I believe that when Christians finally love as Christ, we will again see great change in this world. If a liberal theologian such as Martin Luther King, Jr., can change the racism of a nation in his short life, what could true believers do if they loved as God commands? The second aspect of Martin’s life that should be emulated by Christian leaders is the social Gospel. I absolutely do not assent to a social gospel, as Martin defined it, but a social Gospel. Our Gospel must be something that affects both heart and body. Jesus grand description of his ministry may be found in Luke 4:14-22. In verses eighteen and nineteen, Jesus says, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord.” I once preached that these verses related to purely physical miracles of Christ. They proved his deity and love for our humanity. When I walked into Dr. Allison’s evangelism class, he preached emphatically that these were purely spiritual miracles Christ performed in the lives of people. I now know that we were both right. These miracle are physical and spiritual. When we look at Christ’s ministry, a miracle of physical needs is always followed by preaching of the spiritual need. You rarely see one without the other. In Christian ministry, we must seek to have a social Gospel. A Gospel that touches every aspect of the human life in order to truly have a ministry modeled after Christ. A third area in which Martin should impact Christian ministry is that of education. Not only of the minister, but also of the congregations they serve. We must always be seeking to know more of Christ, and more of the people he died for. Are my answers in my Sunday school class enough to challenge every student? Do I know every student well enough to communicate to them the truth God intends for them to learn through me? The only way I can be that teacher is if I never stop learning. The final thing that can be applied from Martin’s life to the life of the Christian leader is prayer. As I read about Martin’s prayers, I felt terribly disgusted. He denied many of the doctrines I cling to dearly, yet his prayers are fresh, honest, and righteous. It is reasonably sure that he never trusted Jesus as Lord and Savior. But in a strange way, I feel as if God heard him every time he prayed. I look at my prayers, and ask if they are heartfelt communications with God, or wasted words which I will give an account for. Christian Leaders must learn to pray as if they are banging on the door of Heaven, and not leaving till they get an answer. After all, that is what Martin did.
CONCLUSION
As I look at the development of Martin Luther King, Jr., I see many things I can relate to. I am convicted of my own personal sin because of his example. Yet, I realize that he and I would have had serious disagreements. I view him as somewhat of a walking contradiction, his theology was so off, yet he did so much. I feel my theology is so, “right”, yet what have I done to change the world. Martin got a lot wrong, but he sure got a lot right, too. As I finish this paper, I wonder what would the “I Have a Dream” speech have been like if Martin were surrendered to the Lord? Would more of Jesus be prevalent in the legacy? Here is how I believe that speech would have ended:
I say to you today, my friends, so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, God still has a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in His holiness.
He has a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."
He has a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.
He has a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.
He has a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
He has a dream today.
He has a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right there in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers in the Lord Jesus Christ.
He has a dream today.
He has a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together.
This is our hope. This is the faith that I go back to the South with. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.
That will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with a new meaning, "My country, 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing. Land where my fathers died, land of the pilgrim's pride, from every mountainside, let freedom ring."
And if America is to be a great nation this must become true, that Jesus reigns as Lord! So let Jesus is Lord ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire. Let Jesus is Lord ring from the mighty mountains of New York. Let Jesus is Lord ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania!
Let Jesus is Lord ring from the snowcapped Rockies of Colorado!
Let Jesus is Lord ring from the curvaceous slopes of California!
But not only that; let Jesus is Lord ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia!
Let Jesus is Lord ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee!
Let Jesus is Lord ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi. From every mountainside, let Jesus is Lord ring out!
And when this happens, when we allow Jesus to reign, when we let Him reign from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY- NOTE: additional notation available upon request.
Baldwin, Lewis V. Never to Leave Us Alone: the Prayer Life of Martin Luther King, Jr.
Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2010.
Baldwin, Lewis V. There Is a Balm in Gilead. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991.
Carson, Clayborne. The Autobiography of Martin Luther King, Jr. 1ST ed. New York:
Grand Central, 1998.
Carson, Clayborne, Tenisha H. Armstrong, Susan A. Carson, Erin K. Cook, and Susan
Englander. The Martin Luther King, Jr., Encyclopedia. Westport, Conn.:
Greenwood, 2008.
Gandhi, Mahatma. Gandhi in India, in His Own Words. Edited by Martin Green.
Hanover, N.H.: Tufts, 1987.
King, Martin Luther, Jr., A Testament of Hope: the Essential Writings and Speeches of
Martin Luther King, Jr. Edited by James M. Washington. San Francisco:
HarperOne, 1991.
King, Martin Luther, Jr., The Measure of a Man. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2001.
