I am an unabashed fan (and subscriber) of The New Yorker, largely because of articles like this. There are few things in this life that I don’t naturally know everything about, but the magazine does a great job of finding them and presenting them in an interesting and educating fashion. Shockingly, my knowledge of African-American churches was scant, despite my deep amount of caring about both blacks and religion.
The article as a whole is well-researched and very even-handed, if not in every statement, then at least in the extremes in which it portrays individuals. Reverend Wright, for instance, is alternately prophetic and a product of the past, a man of great passion who sits reserved when asked pointed questions; he is “gifted,” but “churlish.” He is, in a word, human. If nothing else, the article is worth reading for its investigation of the dynamic between Black Islam and Black Christianity over the past thirty or forty years.
However, what struck me most about the article was the following passage:
“Though preachers might be more careful now, the dominant rhetorical mode is defiance: Moss and the other preachers cannot afford to be seen as capitulators. During the Good Friday marathon, Reverend Gibson had declared Wright to be “one of the most generous men you will ever meet.” Then he said, “Print that! Put that on the blog!”
It means a lot more if you read the entire article, which is exceedingly easy because it doesn’t near the standard million words of a typical New Yorker lead piece. However, I am reminded by this passage, and the tone of the article in general, of the scene in The Godfather, Part II, where Michael first decides to part ways with Hyman Roth in Cuba. Michael describes the scene which he witnessed earlier in the day, where rebels effectively blew themselves up to take out a Cuban authority figure. To him, it’s a sign that the rebels might win…because they care THAT MUCH.
The analogues are a little squishy at this point, because Black Liberation does not equal Black Separatists (at least, not necessarily), so the church members are technically fighting for something different than the rebels were. However, there will be a point where this anger and these feelings boil over, in a very similar pattern. I have not decided whether I am impressed and deeply moved by their refusal to change their fundamental beliefs in the face of majoritarian outrage (perhaps righteous outrage at that), empathetic because I vaguely understand their situation and know it’s not going to end well for them, or angered by a stubborn anti-rational stance. But I know that I somewhat care in some fashion, which is something.
Cuba was a horrible place before Castro, and the rebels may very well have been justified in their feelings AND actions. However, their homeland wasn’t better afterwards, either. When Roth and Corleone (or their real-life counterparts) pulled out, all that was left for the island was hope, and much like most of these church members seem to have discovered, that isn’t nearly good enough. It’s unclear what would be.