Election Shows Race Gap Between Christians

Polls Reflect Continued Chasm; Black, White Clergy Struggle To Find Common Political Ground

(AP)  The barrier-crossing election of Barack Obama did little to bridge the deep racial divide in American churches. In fact, some clergy say it has only served to underscore their differences.

While nonwhite Christians voted overwhelmingly for Obama, most white Christians backed John McCain, according to exit polls. Several black clergy said that criticism of Obama by some white Christians over his religious beliefs and support for abortion rights crossed the line, hurting longtime efforts to reconcile their communities.

"I think in the eagerness to protect the right to life issues, there were some things said, not about that issue, that were not always fair and that were insensitive that need to be rethought," said Bishop T.D. Jakes, a prominent African-American pastor and founder of The Potter's House, a theologically conservative megachurch in Dallas. "I would love to see black and white Christians find common ground, and a deeper understanding of each other's needs."

The Rev. Al Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, the denomination's flagship school, said white evangelicals backed McCain because of his opposition to abortion rights, not because of the race of either candidate.

"White conservative evangelicals, not just in this election, but in many successive cycles, tended to vote on the basis of moral issues," Mohler said. "Those evangelicals will still join in celebrating, very eagerly, that America has elected an African-American president and see it as a cause for celebration and recognize its deep spiritual significance."

According to Associated Press exit polls, 34 percent of white Protestants voted for Obama, while 65 percent went with McCain. Obama won the overall Roman Catholic vote, but white Catholics backed McCain by a slim majority, 52 percent to 47 percent. Among white Christians, the racial gap was most pronounced with evangelicals: 74 percent backed McCain, 24 percent backed Obama.

The pattern is not new and fits the larger trend of white voters overall, the majority of whom voted for McCain. Even so, white Christians were still part of Obama's winning coalition, drawing millions of their votes. However, the racial gaps stood out at a time when African-American churchgoers exulted in the historic first of Obama's victory.

"The contrast between the white religious community and the nonwhite religious community ... is particularly strong this year," said John Green, an expert on religion and politics and senior fellow at the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.

White conservative Christians are more concerned than ever about reaching out to minorities, particularly as immigration has led to what some call the "browning" of American Christianity. Right now, nearly all U.S. churches serve a single ethnic group.

While white and black Christian conservatives generally share an opposition to abortion rights and gay marriage, they often split over how to end social ills such as poverty and crime.

But the rhetoric this year went beyond the usual differences over worldview, said Derrick W. Hutchins, a leader in the Church of God in Christ. The predominantly African-American group is Pentecostal and one of the largest denomination's in the country.

Hutchins was angered by repeated accusations that he and other black theological conservatives had abandoned their religious beliefs simply to vote for an African-American. The claims came not only from white Christians, but also from some blacks who backed McCain.

"What they did is insult our biblical understanding," said Hutchins, who voted for Obama and has backed Democrats in past presidential elections. "The white religious right-wing determined that if you didn't vote for McCain, you were not meeting a standard of the Bible."

The Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell, an African-American Methodist pastor from Houston, said that some white Christian conservatives had helped fuel false rumors that Obama was Muslim, by questioning whether he was truly Christian and calling his support for abortion rights "demonic" and "diabolical."

Caldwell, an Obama supporter who backed President Bush in the past two elections, said other candidates have diverged dramatically from Christian teachings in their policies and personal lives and have not been maligned as Obama has.

"Some members of the Christian community want to label him as the anti-Christ," said Caldwell. "What has he done to deserve that label, when none of his predecessors are so characterized?"

But Bishop Harry Jackson, an African-American pastor of Hope Christian Church in Washington, D.C., and a McCain supporter, said questions about Obama's more liberal reading of Scripture was fair game. Jackson noted that Obama became an observant Christian through the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, former pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. Videos of Wright's sermons that circulated widely earlier this year showed him cursing the government and accusing it of conspiring against blacks. Obama eventually left the church.

"Many, many people question whether Barack Obama had been under a legitimate Christian leadership figure," Jackson said. "I personally never ascribed any vitriolic character assassination to it."

[erich_1-2009]

Some of this has to do with a culture was going on in Christianity itself. A non-Christian would not understand. Groups such as ELCA, Episcopal Church, liberal Presbyterian, liberal Reformed, and Obama''s, Jeremiah Wright''s United Church are all very liberal and have "Full Communion" with one another. That is what Bishop Jackson is talking about in the article above. Their ideas on Scriptures, (Jesus Seminar - actually pick beads whether it should be in the Bible), social issues, and who or what Jesus is, differs completely from the Roman Catholic, Conservative Christian, and Eastern Orthodox viewpoint. Now, there is a little current history people can do research on.

[erich_1-2009]

Thank you Blackyowe,

I can respect that perspective and will think about it more from that standpoint.

[babooph]

Mc Cain is not religous-the whites were suckered easy ! Palin was whaco enough for their vote though.

[blackyowe]

erich_1, for me the Democratic party has always stood for the middle class. It has long stood for education, the arts, racial equality, the environment, womens rights, and in the respect for other nations around the world. I rarely think about abortion or welfare. Most of my Democratic friends are artists, teachers, musicans, ministers and social workers. Amost all of them are middle class.

[buckscc]

Why is the Press referring to Obama as "A Black President" instead of "A President"?

This offends me.

It shows how the press is racist. Members of the American Press are exploiting the fact that Obama sin is dark. Just listen to the news and count how many times the press referrers to Obama as "A Black President". Does the American Press think that by exploiting the fact that Obama has dark skin, they can get a larger audience making their ratings go up?
What next? Will white businesses start selling kids lunch boxes with Obama%u2019s picture on them? Just how much money is going to be made by exploiting the fact that Obama has dark skin and who is going to be making all that money? To me, our President should be just that, "Our President" and not be continuously described by his/her gender, race, religion, color of her/his skin or any other descriptive adjective. This just shows how unprofessional and racist our American Press really is.

Neither Obama nor McCain has mentioned the race issue during this campaign. It has and still is the American Press who has turned this campaign into a racist issue. I''m sure the American Press will still continue to make this campaign and Obama''s Presidency a Race issue because they want news and if their isn''t any news to report, they will make some news so they will have something to report.

[buckscc]

The American Press, as this article is an example, wants to stir up racial issues in order to create a story so their ratings will go up. One has to understand, the higher the ratings, the more the sponsor pays to the press. The more the press makes the more money the writers get. It is all about ratings and ratings is all about stories. The author of this article is trying to stir up hatred of the races in order to create a bigger story so he will get a fatter paycheck. This is very simple. The author of this article would be tickle pink if there were race riots in the streets again like there were in the 60%u2019s. The American Press doesn%u2019t report the news any more, the make the news. Here, they are trying to get a story on the conflict of the races instead of helping us to (As Rodney King put it) %u201CJust Get Along%u201D. American needs to put the past behind us, for the good of our country. We should all try to get along, for the good of the country. We should, "Just Say No!" to the members of the American Press, like this author, who just wants to stir up racial problems so he can get a story.

[erich_1-2009]

Palin0808,

It may look like that on the surface. That is not really true since African-Americans have votes around 90% Democrat for the past 30 years.

I''m trying to understand the other sides points of view. I guess what Blackyowe is talking about is that he was turned off by the formation of Jerry Falwell''s Moral Majority, and Pat Robertson''s run for the Presidency in 1988.

Facts are that Charles Finney would never have gone along with the ideas of abortion and homosexuality that are part of the Democrat''s platform! Charles Finney was very strong regarding the convicting power of the H.S. regarding sin, and never would have gone along with just a social gospel. Finney''s doctrine regarding the H.S. has led to the Pentecostal Churches described in the article.

It seems to me that you are answering me with the idea that Democrats are being supported by African-American due to their social program ideas. An idea that the Democrats take care of the poor and old etc. better than the Republicans. To my way of thinking the Democrat Party''s stands on welfare, afirmative action, preferential government contracts for minorities, and slavery reparations, are a compromise of religious principles of a Christian, (abortion, homoseuxality, judicial activism, etc), for personal gain and money.

[allmymarbles]

I think as education plays a more important role in the lives of Americans that some of the more outlandish evangelical beliefs, such as creationism, will diminish in importance. Even now it is a hard concept to defend.

[palin0808]

Sounds to me like the black christans are the ones who are the racist. They voted 99 percent for Obama.

[len134]

The Conservative Evangelical Right is the most dangerous force for evil in this country that has ever existed. Satan has put more preachers in their pulpits than God has. They are no less of a hate mongering and bigoted influence than Muslim extremists.

[blackyowe]

Everything changed in the 80s, mccarthy51! The conservative Democrats like Wallace faded away or joined the Republican Party because it had lost its roots in Lincoln and the common man. Look up Dixiecrat. By the late 70s the Republican Party had become the party of Big Business and intolerant evangelicals. They made the decision to put money before God so the high ideals of Lincoln''s party was lost. Lincoln was a deeply religious man. After all the Republican Party had been moving right especially with the influence of the likes of Barry Goldwater since the early 1960s. Goldwater in the end before he died rued the day the Republican party went to bed with the "Christian" far right. Basically everyone seemed to change hats. The Dems became more tolerant and inclusive and the Republicans became less so. The educators and the intellectuals began jumping ship because the Republicans made abortion and evolution their issues not human rights. Obviously there is over lapping and there no stereotypical person exists in either party but there has been a shift so strong few people of color or free thinking people can stand being in the Republican fold anymore. As a well educated, moderate and a Northern Christian I could never stand the Republican platform as it is today. This article is flawed because it lumps all churches together. The Northeast is not the same as the South or the West.

[blackyowe]

The North East and much of the midweat has nothing in common with the Southern Tradition. Although antislavery sentiment had existed during the American Revolution, and abolitionist Benjamin Lundy began his work early in the 19th cent., the abolition movement did not reach crusading proportions until the 1830s. One of it''s strongest forces was the growing influence of evangelical religion, with its religious fervor, its moral urgency to end sinful practices, and its vision of human perfection. The preaching of Lyman Beecher and Nathaniel Taylor in New England and the religious revivals that began in W New York state in 1824 under Charles G. Finney and swept much of the North, created a powerful impulse toward social reform%u2014emancipation of the slaves as well as temperance, foreign missions, and women''s rights. Outstanding among Charles Finney''s converts were Theodore D. Weld and the brothers Arthur Tappan and Lewis Tappan. Do your homework folks. The modern movement of evangelical who are in the mold of Pat Robertson and Gerry Fallwell are 1980s creations meant to subvert real Christian churches into bigots and fakers! We in NY do not claim kin to the hate and wrong done in His name by the likes of the TV generation of "evangelicals".

[Mccarthyaw]

I''''m white, but I am asking a legitimate question that even Black, Conservative, Christian Republicans are asking. Why do strong Christian African-Americans continue to vote against their religious principles 90%-10% every Presidential election.

It''''s a question that I am convinced that the Republican, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., who I quoted below would be asking if he were alive today.

Most African-Americans were Republican in 1965!
The party that has historically opposed African-Americans have been the Democrats.

The Republicans, Abraham Lincoln, signed the Emancipation Proclamation.

The white Democrats of the South were the Party that brought segregation to Blacks, and prejudice.
The Democrats, including Senator Kennedy in 1957 were the ones that opposed the Civil Rights Amendment.

More turned out for this election, but the article is a complete lie since African-Americans have been voting 90% for the Democrats for 30 years.

I am asking the question why a Pentecostal, COGIC, person continually votes Democrat since the principles of abortion, and homosexuality are contrary against their religious convictions.

T.D. Jakes, I have supported you in Charisma Magazine editorial pages, and I ask you Why?

Posted by erich_1 at 01:07 PM : Nov 08, 2008

The Democratic and Republican party essentially switched roles when the South became Republican.

[blackyowe]

White churches of New England began the call for the end of Slavery. We have a different tradition here. The abolitionist movement began with Christians. The idiotic evangelical Churches that are racist are not Christian at all. They have little connection even to the 19th Century evangelical movements. It was early evangelicals who pushed for the women''s right to vote. What we have today is a bunch of racist, bigoted gooold boys, clubs who wouldn''t know Jesus if He bit them on the butt.

[pensacola98]

I can tell you that in Protestant Churches, a Pastor won''t survive if they upset their followers community attitudes.

If the community attitude of the church accepts racism, then a Protestant pastor addressing racism will be replaced at first opportunity.

In Catholic churches, the parish doesn''t have to power to replace their priest over differences as many of their Protestant counterparts.

Many Protestant churches are very political and struggle to survive and grow. Many pastors have started their churches in the South, just to find themselves starving because their followers don''t want to change or eliminate racism. There are numerous churches competing for followers. The ones who give their followers what they want grow the fastest, and the rest just dry up and fade away.

The corporate personality of a church is very profound when racism is present and tolerated. Even a blind man can walk into a racist church and know it is a racist tolerant church.

Some do try, but still have segragated services. Even Catholic churches in South Texas have English masses and Spanish masses, causing segregation over language barriers.

[blackyowe]

The evangelical, conservative churches of the west and south are not the white churches of the North East where I live. Those churches have forgotten the Gospel of Jesus Christ. People here don''t care about race. Those people who can''t handle Obama''s color are not Christians they are White supremacists and should loose their tax status as charities. I don''t even bump into Black people in my everyday life its so white here but this rural county went for Obama. Mind you it was a small margin but still we are not racists here in this area of NY.

[blackyowe]

I am not Black but I voted for Obama and so did me 78 year old white Mother! So much for their stats! My white minister a Methodist who grew up in Alabama voted for Obama as well! Jesus don''t see race he came and died for all mankind so we might live!

[erich_1-2009]

"Election Shows Race Gap Between Christians
Polls Reflect Continued Chasm; Black, White Clergy Struggle To Find Common Political Ground"

The definition of a nut case must be someone who is asking, Why do Conservative Christian African-Americans, (like COGIC), vote Democrat when the Democrats contradict the social values of Christianity and their own Statements of Faith? Especially, considering the below history.

The article does not answer the question, and the question could only be answered for me by a Christian Conservative African-American.

[babooph]

AS long as the rep. party caters to these nut cases ,the brains of the party will continue to leave,the pact they made for easy votes from those brainwashed whacos was not worth it inthe long run.

[erich_1-2009]

I''m white, but I am asking a legitimate question that even Black, Conservative, Christian Republicans are asking. Why do strong Christian African-Americans continue to vote against their religious principles 90%-10% every Presidential election.

It''s a question that I am convinced that the Republican, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., who I quoted below would be asking if he were alive today.

Most African-Americans were Republican in 1965!
The party that has historically opposed African-Americans have been the Democrats.

The Republicans, Abraham Lincoln, signed the Emancipation Proclamation.

The white Democrats of the South were the Party that brought segregation to Blacks, and prejudice.
The Democrats, including Senator Kennedy in 1957 were the ones that opposed the Civil Rights Amendment.

More turned out for this election, but the article is a complete lie since African-Americans have been voting 90% for the Democrats for 30 years.

I am asking the question why a Pentecostal, COGIC, person continually votes Democrat since the principles of abortion, and homosexuality are contrary against their religious convictions.

T.D. Jakes, I have supported you in Charisma Magazine editorial pages, and I ask you Why?