With the success of the ecumenical movement in South Africa, one hopes the same pressure can be applied to the current apartheid arising in the United States. As addressed by Douglas Massey in his 1990 book American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass, the United States since 1970 has witnessed a dramatic increase in poverty along racial lines. The primary locations of poverty are occurring in segregated cities. After the Jim Crow laws ended in the 1960’s, blacks all around the country demanded higher paying jobs, equal representation in government, and an infrastructure which was not prejudiced based on the color of one’s skin. Instead, the opposite occurred with high-pay industrial jobs, which generally attracted non-educated
…show more content…
Why has the church stood by quietly without intervention? Where is the ecumenical community to denounce this atrocity and demand justice and peace? The answers to these questions are difficult to answer. The reality is that this may come too close to home for many American Christians. Unfortunately the truth is that America is a segregated nation and most Christians are unwilling to enact the changes which would end the apartheid. To end the apartheid would require uncomfortable inconveniences in their own lives and a potential decrease in income. American Christians feel self-righteous in denouncing the apartheid in South Africa, but are unwilling to offer reconciliation here in the “Land of the Free”. One of the major critiques of ecumenical work is that all of the power is still based in the United States. Because this has not changed, there is no outside organizational structure available to denounce the American church when it goes astray. And as mentioned at the beginning of this paper, the church is in a state of apathy. Countless changes need to be made, but the church has not rallied around one issue since the South African …show more content…
In 1980, the church represented the majority of people all around the world. Thirty-five years later we find ourselves in a post-Christian world where pluralism has challenged the Christian voice. With this challenge, all mainline denominations are struggling to survive. When a denomination’s budget decreases, administrator look to make cuts to the least vital programs. In the last decade or so, ecumenism has not been the priority of these mainline churches and has become their least vital program. With these budgetary cuts, ecumenical organizations, which used to staff hundreds, now only staff one or two. Examples of this include the Ecumenical Christian Fellowship of New Jersey and the New Jersey Council of Churches. Other ecumenical faith-groups like the Coalition for Peace Action have predicted this challenge and adapted to the times. CFPA was once primarily affiliated only with mainline denominations now seeks to bring about peace and justice through interfaith dialogue and cooperation. Although CFPA still relies on ecumenical groups, they have found that many issues in the world today are not only the concern of Christians. The American apartheid affects Muslims and Sikhs just as much as it does Christians, if not more. The Iran Deal could only occur because Jews, Christians, and Muslims acknowledged that this is the best thing for the world. On a local
Why has the church stood by quietly without intervention? Where is the ecumenical community to denounce this atrocity and demand justice and peace? The answers to these questions are difficult to answer. The reality is that this may come too close to home for many American Christians. Unfortunately the truth is that America is a segregated nation and most Christians are unwilling to enact the changes which would end the apartheid. To end the apartheid would require uncomfortable inconveniences in their own lives and a potential decrease in income. American Christians feel self-righteous in denouncing the apartheid in South Africa, but are unwilling to offer reconciliation here in the “Land of the Free”. One of the major critiques of ecumenical work is that all of the power is still based in the United States. Because this has not changed, there is no outside organizational structure available to denounce the American church when it goes astray. And as mentioned at the beginning of this paper, the church is in a state of apathy. Countless changes need to be made, but the church has not rallied around one issue since the South African …show more content…
In 1980, the church represented the majority of people all around the world. Thirty-five years later we find ourselves in a post-Christian world where pluralism has challenged the Christian voice. With this challenge, all mainline denominations are struggling to survive. When a denomination’s budget decreases, administrator look to make cuts to the least vital programs. In the last decade or so, ecumenism has not been the priority of these mainline churches and has become their least vital program. With these budgetary cuts, ecumenical organizations, which used to staff hundreds, now only staff one or two. Examples of this include the Ecumenical Christian Fellowship of New Jersey and the New Jersey Council of Churches. Other ecumenical faith-groups like the Coalition for Peace Action have predicted this challenge and adapted to the times. CFPA was once primarily affiliated only with mainline denominations now seeks to bring about peace and justice through interfaith dialogue and cooperation. Although CFPA still relies on ecumenical groups, they have found that many issues in the world today are not only the concern of Christians. The American apartheid affects Muslims and Sikhs just as much as it does Christians, if not more. The Iran Deal could only occur because Jews, Christians, and Muslims acknowledged that this is the best thing for the world. On a local