Letter From Birmingham Jail 1
A U G U S T 1 9 6 3
Letter from Birmingham Jail
by Martin Luther King, Jr.

WHILE confined here in the Birmingham city jail, I came across your recent statement calling our present activities “unwise and untimely.” Seldom, if ever, do I pause to answer criticism of my work and ideas. If I sought to answer all of the criticisms that cross my desk, my secretaries would be engaged in little else in the course of the day, and I would have no time for constructive work. But since I feel that you are men of genuine good will and your criticisms are sincerely set forth, I would like to answer your statement in what I hope will be patient and reasonable terms.
I think I should give the reason for my being in Birmingham, since you have been influenced by the argument of “outsiders coming in.” I have the honor of serving as president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, an organization operating in every Southern state, with headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia. We have some eighty-five affiliate organizations all across the South, one being the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights. Whenever necessary and possible, we share staff,
educational and financial resources with our affiliates. Several months ago our local affiliate here in Birmingham invited us to be on call to engage in a nonviolent direct-action program if such were deemed necessary. We readily consented, and when the hour came we lived up to our promises. So I am here, along with several members of my staff, because we were invited here. I am here because I have basic organizational ties here.
Beyond this, I am in Birmingham because injustice is here. Just as the eighth-century prophets left their little villages and carried their “thus saith the Lord” far beyond the boundaries of their hometowns; and just as the Apostle Paul left his little village of Tarsus and carried the gospel of Jesus Christ to practically every hamlet and city of the Greco-Roman world, I too am compelled to carry the gospel of freedom beyond my particular hometown. Like Paul, I must constantly respond to the Macedonian call for
aid.
Moreover, I am cognizant of the interrelatedness of all communities and states. I cannot sit idly by in Atlanta and not be concerned about what happens in Birmingham. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial “outside agitator” idea. Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider.
You deplore the demonstrations that are presently taking place in Birmingham. But I am sorry that your statement did not express a similar concern for the conditions that brought the demonstrations into being. I am sure that each of you would want to go beyond the superficial social analyst who looks merely at effects and does not grapple with underlying causes. I would not hesitate to say that it is unfortunate that so-called demonstrations are taking place in Birmingham at this time, but I would say in
more emphatic terms that it is even more unfortunate that the white power structure of this city left the Negro community with no other alternative.

IN ANY nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices are alive, negotiation, self-purification, and direct action. We have gone through all of these steps in Birmingham. There can be no gainsaying of the fact that racial injustice engulfs this community. Birmingham is probably the most thoroughly segregated city in the United States. Its ugly record of police brutality is known in every section of this country. Its unjust treatment of Negroes in the courts is a notorious reality. There have been more unsolved bombings of Negro homes and churches in Birmingham than in any other city in this nation. These are the hard, brutal, and unbelievable facts. On the basis of them, Negro leaders sought to negotiate with the city fathers. But the political leaders consistently refused to engage in good-faith negotiation.
Then came the opportunity last September to talk with some of the leaders of the economic community. In these negotiating sessions certain promises were made by the merchants, such as the promise to remove the humiliating racial signs from the stores. On the basis of these promises, Reverend Shuttlesworth and the leaders of the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights agreed to call a moratorium on any type of demonstration. As the weeks and months unfolded, we realized that we were
the victims of a broken promise. The signs remained. As in so many experiences of the past, we were confronted with blasted hopes, and the dark shadow of a deep disappointment settled upon us. So we had no alternative except that of preparing for direct action, whereby we would present our very bodies as a means of laying our case before the conscience of the local and national community. We were not unmindful of the difficulties involved. So we decided to go through a process of self-purification. We
started having workshops on nonviolence and repeatedly asked ourselves the questions, “Are you able to accept blows without retaliating?” and “Are you able to endure the ordeals of jail?” We decided to set our direct-action program around the Easter season, realizing that, with exception of Christmas, this was the largest shopping period of the year. Knowing that a strong economic withdrawal program would be the by-product of direct action, we felt that this was the best time to bring pressure on the merchants for the needed changes. Then it occurred to us that the March election was ahead, and so we speedily decided to postpone action until after election day. When we discovered that Mr. Conner was in the runoff, we decided again to postpone action so that the demonstration could not be used to cloud the issues. At this time we agreed to begin our nonviolent witness the day after the runoff.
This reveals that we did not move irresponsibly into direct action. We, too, wanted to see Mr. Conner defeated, so we went through postponement after postponement to aid in this community need. After this we felt that direct action could be delayed no longer. You may well ask, “Why direct action, why sit-ins, marches, and so forth? Isn’t negotiation a better path?” You are exactly right in your call for negotiation. Indeed, this is the purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and establish such creative tension that a community that has consistently refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. I just referred to the creation of tension as a part of the work of the nonviolent resister. This may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word “tension.” I have earnestly worked and preached against violent tension, but there is a type of constructive nonviolent tension that is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, we must see the need of having
nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men to rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. So, the purpose of direct action is to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. We therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in the tragic attempt to live in monologue rather than dialogue.
One of the basic points in your statement is that our acts are untimely. Some have asked, “Why didn’t you give the new administration time to act?” The only answer that I can give to this inquiry is that the new administration must be prodded about as much as the outgoing one before it acts. We will be sadly mistaken if we feel that the election of Mr. Boutwell will bring the millennium to Birmingham. While Mr. Boutwell is much more articulate and gentle than Mr. Conner, they are both segregationists, dedicated to the task of maintaining the status quo. The hope I see in Mr. Boutwell is that he will be reasonable enough to see the futility of massive resistance to desegregation. But he will not see this without pressure from the devotees of civil rights. My friends, I must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. History is the long and tragic story of the fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups are more immoral than individuals.
We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have never yet engaged in a direct-action movement that was “well timed” according to the timetable of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word “wait.” It rings in the ear of every Negro with a piercing familiarity. This “wait” has almost always meant “never.” It has been a tranquilizing thalidomide, relieving the emotional stress for a moment, only to give birth to an ill-formed infant of frustration. We must come to see with the distinguished jurist of yesterday that “justice too long delayed is justice denied.” We have waited for more than three hundred and forty years for our God-given and constitutional rights. The nations of Asia and Africa are moving with jetlike speed toward the goal of political independence, and we still creep at horse-and-buggy pace toward the gaining of a cup of coffee at a lunch counter. I guess it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say “wait.” But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate-filled policemen curse, kick, brutalize, and even kill your black brothers and sisters with impunity; when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six-year-old daughter why she cannot go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her little eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see the depressing clouds of inferiority begin to form in her little mental sky, and see her begin to distort her little personality by unconsciously developing a bitterness toward white people; when you have to concoct an answer for a five-year-old son asking in agonizing pathos, “Daddy, why do white people treat colored people so mean?”; when you take a cross-country drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day in and day out by nagging signs reading “white” and “colored”; when your first name becomes “nigger” and your middle name becomes “boy” (however old you are) and your last name becomes “John,” and when your wife and mother are never given the respected title “Mrs.”; when you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never knowing what to expect next, and plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of “nobodyness” — then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over and men are no longer willing to be plunged into an abyss of injustice where they experience the bleakness of corroding despair. I hope, sirs, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience.
YOU express a great deal of anxiety over our willingness to break laws. This is certainly a legitimate concern. Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court’s decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools, it is rather strange and paradoxical to find us consciously breaking laws. One may well ask, “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” The answer is found in the fact that there are two types of laws: there are just laws, and there are unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that “An unjust law is no law at all.”
Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine when a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law, or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas, an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All segregation statutes are unjust because
segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality. It gives the segregator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority. To use the words of Martin Buber, the great Jewish philosopher, segregation substitutes an “I – it” relationship for the “I – thou” relationship and ends up relegating persons to the status of things. So segregation is not only politically, economically, and sociologically unsound, but it is morally wrong and sinful. Paul Tillich has said that sin is
separation. Isn’t segregation an existential expression of man’s tragic separation, an expression of his awful estrangement, his terrible sinfulness? So I can urge men to obey the 1954 decision of the Supreme Court because it is morally right, and I can urge them to disobey segregation ordinances because they are morally wrong.
Let us turn to a more concrete example of just and unjust laws. An unjust law is a code that a majority inflicts on a minority that is not binding on itself. This is difference made legal. On the other hand, a just law is a code that a majority compels a minority to follow, and that it is willing to follow itself. This is sameness made legal.
Let me give another explanation. An unjust law is a code inflicted upon a minority which that minority had no part in enacting or creating because it did not have the unhampered right to vote. Who can say that the legislature of Alabama which set up the segregation laws was democratically elected? Throughout the state of Alabama all types of conniving methods are used to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters, and there are some counties without a single Negro registered to vote, despite
the fact that the Negroes constitute a majority of the population. Can any law set up in such a state be considered democratically structured?
These are just a few examples of unjust and just laws. There are some instances when a law is just on its face and unjust in its application. For instance, I was arrested Friday on a charge of parading without a permit. Now, there is nothing wrong with an ordinance which requires a permit for a parade, but when the ordinance is used to preserve segregation and to deny citizens the First Amendment privilege of peaceful assembly and peaceful protest, then it becomes unjust.
Of course, there is nothing new about this kind of civil disobedience. It was seen sublimely in the refusal of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego to obey the laws of Nebuchadnezzar because a higher moral law was involved. It was practiced superbly by the early Christians, who were willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating pain of chopping blocks before submitting to certain unjust laws of the Roman Empire. To a degree, academic freedom is a reality today because Socrates practiced civil disobedience.
We can never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was “legal” and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was “illegal.” It was “illegal” to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. But I am sure that if I had lived in Germany during that time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers even though it was illegal. If I lived in a Communist country today where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I believe I would openly advocate disobeying
these anti-religious laws.
I MUST make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizens Councillor or the Ku Klux Klanner but the white moderate who is more devoted to order than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace
which is the presence of justice; who constantly says, “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can’t agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically feels that he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by the myth of time; and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

In your statement you asserted that our actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they precipitate violence. But can this assertion be logically made? Isn’t this like condemning the robbed man because his possession of money precipitated the evil act of robbery? Isn’t this like condemning Socrates because his unswerving commitment to truth and his philosophical delvings precipitated the misguided popular mind to make him drink the hemlock? Isn’t this like condemning Jesus because His unique God-consciousness and never-ceasing devotion to His will precipitated the evil act of crucifixion? We must come to see, as federal courts have consistently affirmed, that it is immoral to urge an individual to withdraw his efforts to gain his basic constitutional rights because the quest precipitates violence. Society must protect the robbed and punish the robber.
I had also hoped that the white moderate would reject the myth of time. I received a letter this morning from a white brother in Texas which said, “All Christians know that the colored people will receive equal rights eventually, but is it possible that you are in too great of a religious hurry? It has taken Christianity almost 2000 years to accomplish what it has. The teachings of Christ take time to come to earth.” All that is said here grows out of a tragic misconception of time. It is the strangely irrational notion that there is something in the very flow of time that will inevitably cure all ills. Actually, time is neutral. It can be used either destructively or constructively. I am coming to feel that the people of ill will have used time much more effectively than the people of good will. We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people. We must come to see that human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability. It comes through the tireless efforts and persistent work of men willing to be coworkers with God, and without this hard work time
itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation.
YOU spoke of our activity in Birmingham as extreme. At first I was rather disappointed that fellow clergymen would see my nonviolent efforts as those of an extremist. I started thinking about the fact that I stand in the middle of two opposing forces in the Negro community. One is a force of complacency made up of Negroes who, as a result of long years of oppression, have been so completely drained of self-respect and a sense of “somebodyness” that they have adjusted to segregation, and, on the other hand, of a few Negroes in the middle class who, because of a degree of academic and economic security and because at points they profit by segregation, have unconsciously become insensitive to the problems of the masses. The other force is one of bitterness and hatred and comes perilously close to advocating violence. It is expressed in the various black nationalist groups that are springing up over the nation, the largest and best known being Elijah Muhammad’s Muslim movement. This movement isnourished by the contemporary frustration over the continued existence of racial discrimination. It is made up of people who have lost faith in America, who have absolutely repudiated Christianity, and who have concluded that the white man is an incurable devil. I have tried to stand between these two forces, saying that we need not follow the do-nothingism of the complacent or the hatred and despair of the black nationalist. There is a more excellent way, of love and nonviolent protest. I’m grateful to God that, through the Negro church, the dimension of nonviolence entered our struggle. If this philosophy had not emerged, I am convinced that by now many streets of the South would be flowing with floods of blood. And I am further convinced that if our white brothers dismiss as “rabble-rousers” and “outside agitators” those of us who are working through the channels of nonviolent direct action and refuse to support our nonviolent efforts, millions of Negroes, out of frustration and despair, will seek solace and security in black nationalist ideologies, a development that will lead inevitably to a frightening racial nightmare.
Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The urge for freedom will eventually come. This is what has happened to the American Negro. Something within has reminded him of his birthright of freedom; something without has reminded him that he can gain it. Consciously and unconsciously, he has been swept in by what the Germans call the Zeitgeist, and with his black brothers of Africa and his brown and yellow brothers of Asia, South America, and the Caribbean, he is moving with a sense of cosmic urgency toward the promised land of racial justice. Recognizing this vital urge that has engulfed the Negro community, one should readily understand public demonstrations. The Negro has many pent-up resentments and latent frustrations. He has to get them out. So let him march sometime; let him have his prayer pilgrimages to the city hall; understand why he must have sitins and freedom rides. If his repressed emotions do not come out in these nonviolent ways, they will come out in ominous expressions of violence. This is not a threat; it is a fact of history. So I have not said to my people, “Get rid of your discontent.”
But I have tried to say that this normal and healthy discontent can be channeled through the creative outlet of nonviolent direct action. Now this approach is being dismissed as extremist. I must admit that I was initially disappointed in being so categorized. But as I continued to think about the matter, I gradually gained a bit of satisfaction from being considered an extremist. Was not Jesus an extremist in love? — “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, pray for them that despitefully use you.” Was not Amos an extremist for justice? — “Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.” Was not Paul an extremist for the gospel of Jesus Christ? — “I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.” Was not Martin Luther an extremist? — “Here I stand; I can do no other so help me God.” Was not John Bunyan an extremist? — “I will stay in jail to the end of my days before I make a mockery of my conscience.” Was not Abraham Lincoln an extremist? — “This nation cannot survive half slave and half free.” Was not Thomas Jefferson an extremist? — “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” So the question is not whether we will be extremist, but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate, or will we be extremists for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice, or will we be extremists for the cause of justice?

I had hoped that the white moderate would see this. Maybe I was too optimistic. Maybe I expected too much. I guess I should have realized that few members of a race that has oppressed another race can understand or appreciate the deep groans and passionate yearnings of those that have been oppressed, and still fewer have the vision to see that injustice must be rooted out by strong, persistent, and determined action. I am thankful, however, that some of our white brothers have grasped the meaning of
this social revolution and committed themselves to it. They are still all too small in quantity, but they are big in quality. Some, like Ralph McGill, Lillian Smith, Harry Golden, and James Dabbs, have written about our struggle in eloquent, prophetic, and understanding terms. Others have marched with us down nameless streets of the South. They sat in with us at lunch counters and rode in with us on the freedom rides. They have languished in filthy roach-infested jails, suffering the abuse and brutality of angry policemen who see them as “dirty nigger lovers.” They, unlike many of their moderate brothers, have recognized the urgency of the moment and sensed the need for powerful “action” antidotes to combat the disease of segregation.
LET me rush on to mention my other disappointment. I have been disappointed with the white church and its leadership. Of course, there are some notable exceptions. I am not unmindful of the fact that each of you has taken some significant stands on this issue. I commend you, Reverend Stallings, for your Christian stand this past Sunday in welcoming Negroes to your Baptist Church worship service on a nonsegregated basis. I commend the Catholic leaders of this state for integrating Springhill College
several years ago.
But despite these notable exceptions, I must honestly reiterate that I have been disappointed with the church. I do not say that as one of those negative critics who can always find something wrong with the church. I say it as a minister of the gospel who loves the church, who was nurtured in its bosom, who has been sustained by its Spiritual blessings, and who will remain true to it as long as the cord of life shall lengthen.
I had the strange feeling when I was suddenly catapulted into the leadership of the bus protest in Montgomery several years ago that we would have the support of the white church. I felt that the white ministers, priests, and rabbis of the South would be some of our strongest allies. Instead, some few have been outright opponents, refusing to understand the freedom movement and misrepresenting its leaders; all too many others have been more cautious than courageous and have remained silent behind the
anesthetizing security of stained-glass windows.
In spite of my shattered dreams of the past, I came to Birmingham with the hope that the white religious leadership of this community would see the justice of our cause and with deep moral concern serve as the channel through which our just grievances could get to the power structure. I had hoped that each of you would understand. But again I have been disappointed.
I have heard numerous religious leaders of the South call upon their worshipers to comply with a desegregation decision because it is the law, but I have longed to hear white ministers say, follow this decree because integration is morally right and the Negro is your brother. In the midst of blatant injustices inflicted upon the Negro, I have watched white churches stand on the sidelines and merely mouth pious irrelevancies and sanctimonious trivialities. In the midst of a mighty struggle to rid our nation of racial and economic injustice, I have heard so many ministers say, “Those are social issues which the gospel has nothing to do with,” and I have watched so many churches commit themselves to a completely otherworldly religion which made a strange distinction between bodies and souls, the sacred and the secular.

There was a time when the church was very powerful. It was during that period that the early Christians rejoiced when they were deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed. In those days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was the thermostat that transformed the mores of society. Wherever the early Christians entered a town the power structure got disturbed and immediately sought to convict them for being “disturbers of the peace” and ”outside agitators.” But they went on with the conviction that they were “a colony of heaven” and had to obey God rather than man. They were small in number but big in commitment. They were too God-intoxicated to be “astronomically intimidated.”
They brought an end to such ancient evils as infanticide and gladiatorial contest. Things are different now. The contemporary church is so often a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. It is so often the arch supporter of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the church’s often vocal sanction of things as they are.
But the judgment of God is upon the church as never before. If the church of today does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authentic ring, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century. I meet young people every day whose disappointment with the church has risen to outright disgust.
I hope the church as a whole will meet the challenge of this decisive hour. But even if the church does not come to the aid of justice, I have no despair about the future. I have no fear about the outcome of our struggle in Birmingham, even if our motives are presently misunderstood. We will reach the goal of freedom in Birmingham and all over the nation, because the goal of America is freedom. Abused and scorned though we may be, our destiny is tied up with the destiny of America. Before the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth, we were here. Before the pen of Jefferson scratched across the pages of history the majestic word of the Declaration of Independence, we were here. For more than two centuries our foreparents labored here without wages; they made cotton king; and they built the homes of their masters in the midst of brutal injustice and shameful humiliation — and yet out of a bottomless vitality our people continue to thrive and develop. If the inexpressible cruelties of slavery could not stop us, the opposition we now face will surely fail. We will win our freedom because the sacred heritage of our nation and the eternal will of God are embodied in our echoing demands.
I must close now. But before closing I am impelled to mention one other point in your statement that troubled me profoundly. You warmly commended the Birmingham police force for keeping “order” and “preventing violence.” I don’t believe you would have so warmly commended the police force if you had seen its angry violent dogs literally biting six unarmed, nonviolent Negroes. I don’t believe you would so quickly commend the policemen if you would observe their ugly and inhuman treatment of Negroes here in the city jail; if you would watch them push and curse old Negro women and young Negro girls; if you would see them slap and kick old Negro men and young boys, if you would observe them, as they did on two occasions, refusing to give us food because we wanted to sing our grace together. I’m sorry that I can’t join you in your praise for the police department.

It is true that they have been rather disciplined in their public handling of the demonstrators. In this sense they have been publicly “nonviolent.” But for what purpose? To preserve the evil system of segregation. Over the last few years I have consistently preached that nonviolence demands that the means we use must be as pure as the ends we seek. So I have tried to make it clear that it is wrong to use immoral means to attain moral ends. But now I must affirm that it is just as wrong, or even more, to use
moral means to preserve immoral ends.
I wish you had commended the Negro demonstrators of Birmingham for their sublime courage, their willingness to suffer, and their amazing discipline in the midst of the most inhuman provocation. One day the South will recognize its real heroes. They will be the James Merediths, courageously and with a majestic sense of purpose facing jeering and hostile mobs and the agonizing loneliness that characterizes the life of the pioneer. They will be old, oppressed, battered Negro women, symbolized in a seventy-two-year-old woman of Montgomery, Alabama, who rose up with a sense of dignity and with her people decided not to ride the segregated buses, and responded to one who inquired about her tiredness with ungrammatical profundity, “My feets is tired, but my soul is rested.” They will be young high school and college students, young ministers of the gospel and a host of their elders courageously and nonviolently sitting in at lunch counters and willingly going to jail for conscience’s sake. One day the South will know that when these disinherited children of God sat down at lunch counters they were in reality standing up for the best in the American dream and the most sacred values in our Judeo-Christian heritage.
Never before have I written a letter this long — or should I say a book? I’m afraid that it is much too long to take your precious time. I can assure you that it would have been much shorter if I had been writing from a comfortable desk, but what else is there to do when you are alone for days in the dull monotony of a narrow jail cell other than write long letters, think strange thoughts, and pray long prayers?
If I have said anything in this letter that is an understatement of the truth and is indicative of an unreasonable impatience, I beg you to forgive me. If I have said anything in this letter that is an overstatement of the truth and is indicative of my having a patience that makes me patient with anything less than brotherhood, I beg God to forgive me.
Yours for the cause of Peace and Brotherhood,
MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.
————————————————————————
Copyright © 1963, Martin Luther King, Jr. All rights reserved.
The Atlantic Monthly; August 1963; The Negro Is Your Brother; Volume 212, No. 2; pages 78 – 88.

“Have you talked to God about your problems as much as you have telling other people?” is a statement I recently read. I like it. It is a good question for Christians to answer because your answer is a sign of the health of your prayer life.

We are encouraged to pray continually (1 Thes. 5:17) and unload all our anxieties on God (1 Pet. 5:7). Do you talk to God about what is bugging you, bothering you or annoying you before you rattle on about it to your spouse, friends or co-workers? Do you feel as comfortable sharing the same information to God as you do your confidants? If it is easier to tell others more than you tell God, is it possible you have a perception problem of God? It may be difficult to talk to God if we don’t view Him as someone that wants to hear our every word.

God is a person, and he desires to walk and listen to us. Do you remember what God was described doing in the Garden of Eden when Adam and Eve ran to hide from Him? God was walking in the Garden (Gen. 3:8). Adam and Eve were accustomed to having God walk among them. God wants to be around His people. Jesus is a reflection of this since he is the full reflection of God (Col. 2:9). God is not aloof, unconcerned or too busy for us. God “wants to be bothered” with our daily details.

You talk to others because you think they will listen. Sometimes they offer feedback, sometimes they don’t. God has a way of answering that we don’t have figured out. If we remember that God is a person, that He wants to hear from us more than anyone else and that He does respond to our prayers (just not always in the same ways as our flesh and blood friends), then we have a good foundation upon which to build a stronger, more consistent prayer life. God is a person, too. Take the time to talk to Him.

Loss is a universal experience. Everyone that lives long enough suffers the loss of, or separation from, someone they love, cherish and trust. Loss can leave you feeling empty, hurt and despondent. Sometimes, all you feel like doing is crying. Crying, grief, and mourning: whatever you want to call it, how you think about it will affect how you heal and move forward in life.

Jesus cried over the loss of his friend Lazarus, as well as witnessing the pain of the family left behind (John 11:32-35). Jesus was the strongest man that ever lived. Jesus had more faith than any human being in history. Jesus was God, the creator of the universe, in the flesh (John 1:14; Colossians 2:9). Jesus cried! Crying is not an inherent sign of weakness. Crying is natural, it is human. One of the most unhealthy, dehumanizing things you can do to yourself when suffering loss and grief is to keep yourself from crying.

If crying was a bad thing, and did not have its place, Jesus would not have done it. Is there a certain period of time when you should not cry over a loved one? If there is, I have not read it. I have observed that they more you feel guilty about crying, or that you should not cry anymore, than it can actually get worse. God has all the time in the world for your tears (1 Peter 5:6-7). The tears come from your cares, your burdens, your pain, your hurt. God invites you to unload your cares on him. God never gave you a deadline, so don’t make one for yourself.

What if you are not hard on yourself about crying, but you work in public, or do not want to depress everyone around you by your crying? I can understand the difficulty of wanting to unload at the mention of someone’s name, or when a memory comes up suddenly in your mind. It can make it difficult to get work done. Plus, you don’t want people walking on eggshells worried that they may say something to trigger your tears. Try some of the following things that may help during difficult times of sorrow:

• Wake up early, or stay up a little later, and have some alone time with your memories.
• Write down how blessed you were by your departed loved ones. Write down why you miss them. As much as it can hurt to think about, it has a tremendous way of helping the healing process.
• As much as you acknowledge the death of your loved one(s), also acknowledge the blessedness of where they are now. For example, as much as I want my mother, brother, and step-father here for just an hour, I never want to take them away from the peace they enjoy. This practice can help create a healthy thought balance.
• Adopt an activity in their honor. If you are alone during the holidays because the ones you used to share them with are no longer here, volunteer your time at a shelter. Give yourself to others that ache for someone’s love and attention, too.
• Write cards, or make call to others, telling them how much they mean to you. Ask them how their life is going, and thank God for all they are doing and have in life.

These are just a few ideas that can help during the times you feel like all you want

to do is cry. Don’t feel guilty about it, just make some time for it. Do not run away from it, but embrace it as a healthy part of your healing and growth. Think about it: if you did not hurt and cry, then did you really have anything worth missing at all? Your sorrow is just evidence you had someone really good in your life. What a blessing to treasure! If you find that after time the grief and pain does not ease, have the courage to talk to a counselor or minister. They are there to listen and care for you. If they believe you need more help, they will certainly advise you where you can find it. When you feel like all you want to do is cry, it is a sign you were blessed in life. You have friends that care, and others need your love shared with them.

***What are some things that have helped you during the times of sorrow and hurt? I would love to hear about it. Feel free to e-mail me at coffeedrinkingpreacher@gmail.com or (806) 240-3087.

            The Psalmist wrote, “Children are a heritage from the Lord, offspring a reward from him (Psalm 127:3).” The word ‘heritage’ can also be translated as ‘inheritance’ or ‘gift’. Children are not created to be looked at as a burden, a ball and chain or an object to be used for whatever we want. We can assume everybody obviously understands and respects this fact, but statistics and the news remind us that is not the case.

            Our children need to be directed in the ways of the Lord (Ephesians 6:4). From the time God called a specific group of people to be identified as his own, He has stressed the importance of instructing our children in the right ways (Deuteronomy 6:4-7). It is not only our own biological children for whom God wants us to look after. In both the Old and New Testaments, Jehovah instructs his people to look after the fatherless (i.e. the orphans, or abandoned children; Deuteronomy 27:19; James 1:27).

            God wants us to protect children the way he protects us. Can you imagine Heaven being great if God will allow any one of us to be harmed? When Israel was preparing to enter the Canaan, God warned them not to follow after the religions of the land. Among the detestable things the Canaanites practiced in their worship was offering their children in deadly sacrifices to their gods (Deut. 12:31; 18:9-10). God was repulsed by this worship.

            Reality is that we can be disappointed by the people we love and respect the most. When we are hurt by their actions, it in no way diminishes the value of the right things they said and did. Follow the right ways. We must remember the greatest things are charged to do: protect our children. That comes before making another adult happy. God has charged his people with the welfare of children. May we never be tempted to sacrifice the welfare of a child in order to preserve the honor of any man we respect or make a god.

           Bullying is more than a school problem.  Bullying happens in homes, businesses and communities.  Intimidation, name calling, slander and threats happen all too often and casually. It is not unheard of for people to shrug off the problem thinking things cannot change.  How often do we give up believing life can be better because that is just “the way things are”?

            How sad that any woman would have to live in fear of what her husband may say or do next that damages her mentally, emotionally and/or physically. How many men are left feeling worthless on their jobs regardless of how hard they work due to insults hurled by their employer or co-workers?  How many people live in our community and feel like they are judged because of their past? How many are mocked by others because of their dress, skin color, relatives and piercings? How many children observe any of this behavior in their own homes?

            Do we really want our children growing up to believe that this is the way it will always be?  Do we not want our children to believe they can change things for the better?  Don’t we want our community to believe that things can change, and enjoy a life far different than we just described?  If you are left feeling discouraged and that there is nothing you can do to help make a difference, I want to challenge you to learn more about Rachel’s Challenge this Thursday, November 10^th, at 7 P.M. at Dimmitt Middle School. Maybe you are willing and ready to see change, and are wondering what you can do to help.  Then Rachel’s Challenge is for you, too.

            Rachel Scott was the first victim of the Columbine shootings that took place in 1999 in Littleton, Colorado.  Though Rachel died far too young, her ethic of living is making a major impact on communities all over the world.  Before she died, she already lived by an ethic of kindness convinced she could change lives. Not only did she believe and practice it, Rachel’s kindness worked.  Rachel believed you could start a chain reaction with kindness. Students had already been encouraged by her at school when others put them down.  Peers were already enjoying a sense of hope and reasons to smile because of the work Rachel did.

            Rachel had a challenge for us all.  She did not believe we had to accept the way things are. Rachel believed that change started with each of us. She lived by an ethic that we can all follow.  Rachel lived as if bullying and fear did not have to rule others’ lives.  A positive, encouraging, non-threatening environment can exist in our homes, schools, businesses and communities.  It is a challenging prospect, but it is well worth the effort making it happen.  Are you ready for Rachel’s Challenge?  Would you like to know more?  No matter your age, the Rachel’s Challenge event is for YOU!

            Change does not only begin at home. It happens by how you treat and talk about others when you are out eating, exercising, and visiting with friends.  Find out how you can start a chain reaction of kindness in Castro County by attending the Rachel’s Challenge event this Thursday.  You will not regret it.

It is easy to believe the worst about something you do not already like. For example, it is easier for me to believe a Cabbage Salad tastes horrible if I already do not like the taste of cabbage. Is it always good to make conclusions about people and actions based on our preferences before knowing the facts? Does the phrase, “if it walks like a duck, and acts like a duck, then it must be a duck,” always ring true? When children dress up and act like their favorite characters or animals, they will sound and act like the object they imitate. Does that mean they are no longer children? Of course not. We must be careful what evidence we use before we make judgments. It can have disastrous consequences.

Jesus was accused of being a drunk (Luke 7:33-34). Jesus’ accusers wanted Jesus to look bad, and they used the ‘evidence’ of his drinking wine to accuse Him of being a drunk. Jesus knew his actions would speak for themselves (Luke 7:35). However, did people believe Jesus was a drunk because of what was claimed and their ‘evidence’? Joseph was condemned to prison because Potiphar’s wife had “evidence” that logically seemed to “fit the crime” (Genesis 39:16-20). Joseph was not guilty of the crime of which he was accused, but was still condemned because Potiphar believed the “evidence” that was presented. In both cases, we want to remember that our motive will affect how much we will pursue the truth. If we could care less about the person, or the consequences that may occur, then we may not be diligent to examine if the evidence and accusations are legitimate. We can miss a lot if we simply go along with accusations because they are easy to believe. It can even hurt ourselves in the long run.

The conclusions was make and state about people or actions based on what we read in the paper, internet, or hear on the news and conversations is either a truth or a lie. Regardless of the source of our information, our statements are either one or the other. Followers of Jesus want to be careful what conclusions we make. Satan is the father of lies (John 8:44). Jesus was: full of truth (John 1:14); spoke the truth (Matthew 22:16); and, was the truth (John 14:6). Jesus cares about truth, his speech was known to bee full of truth, while Satan is attributed as the source of lies. When we repeat information, may we reflect the heart of Jesus and not act in step with the ways of Satan. Satan will use what we want to believe to propagate lies and deception. He wants us to repeat lies because they are a part of his kingdom. Sometimes, finding out the truth can be very difficult, especially in a day with so much he said/she said given as information. Regardless of the difficulty at times, it is better to be quiet on a matter than repeat a lie. Lies have damaging effects far more than we realize. If not, Satan would not use them.

Jesus was a drunk. If I preached that about Jesus, people would be upset because it was not true about Him. We would not like it if I preached lies based on here say and partial evidence about people in our community. Since God is the Creator of all people, I wonder if God wants us to talk about other people, even strangers, when we don’t always know the facts. It is a matter of treating others the way we would want to be treated (Matthew 7:12). If we do not want others claiming Jesus was a drunk, may we be careful not to assign motives and judge other people if we have not taken the time to know all the facts available. What we speak will either be a truth or a lie. My devotion to Jesus will determine how much I care about what I repeat.

Halloween was not always a holiday for children dressing up in their favorite costumes seeking candy and fun. There was a time when people believed it was the day when spirits of the dead wandered around looking for bodies to inhabit. To avoid being overtaken, people would disguise themselves. Many years have passed since then, and Halloween is celebrated without any inkling of escaping the spirits of the dead. How can people dress up as their favorite characters and have a good time on a holiday with an un-Christian history? It is possible because of Jesus.

Jesus turns things around, and is able to overcome evil with good (Romans 12:9). Instead of running from the darkness, we are challenged to let our lights shine before men (Matthew 5:16). According to Jesus, we accomplish this by our good works. One example of Jesus doing this was how he treated Zacchaeus (Luke 19). He did not treat tax collectors like was commonly done by the Jews. Instead, Jesus started a new trend by treating Zacchaeus with dignity and respect. We have done this with the Christmas holiday. Until the 4th century, it was popularly celebrated as the birthday of Phrygia, the sun god. Finally, the day became a celebration of Christ’s birth. We can change how things are done!

How does Jesus invade Halloween? When people get involved with pranks, make sure they are considerate of their neighbors by not doing any damage to property or causing any other harm (Matthew 7:12). When dressing up, don’t do things that lead others to entertain inappropriate desires (this is mostly aimed at adult costumes). Children will refrain from stealing candy from other kids. We can help our children learn to share candy instead of always grabbing “the best” leaving others without some. It is also a wonderful time for children to express gratitude for their neighbors’ thoughtfulness in making the holiday fun. PTO sponsors a Halloween Carnival that raises money to help our schools (and involves several local businesses). Trunk or treat events also help parents enjoy a safe and friendly environment for their children. Halloween does not have to be used to honor evil. We can submit to doing good, and making it the normal thing to do on Halloween. That is how Jesus invades Halloween.

Mumford & Son’s “After the Son”

We know Jesus was able to love people that lied about him.  Jesus proved this by keeping company with Judas for over three years.  Jesus revealed this love when He asked the Father to forgive the ones that had him crucified.  Lies and deception were a major tool they used to have Jesus killed. Christians are encouraged to follow Jesus’s great example of love (1 Cor. 11:1; Eph. 5:1-2).  How can we get our hearts and minds in that place where we can love a liar even though we may be hurt, disappointed, and/or betrayed again?

One of the main things we must remember that will help us learn to radically love a liar is God wants us to bless others (1 Peter 3:8-9).  Yes, we crave love to be returned.  Sure, we crave and need trust.  However, love is not always reciprocated the way we like.  It may never by returned by someone we know.  When this happens, we are not blessed when we react to the harm.  Peter assures us that we are still blessed in a relationship when we do not return evil for evil, but return blessing instead.  Though lies and deceit hurt, we can still bless the liar.

There are many ways we can bless the liar in our life.  We can do this by not gossiping about him.  We bless the liar by praying for his well-being, and ask that he learn a better way to get things accomplished than by lying.  We can also stop demanding that he be something he is not at the current time.  Yes, we want the lies, deceit, betrayal, and hurt to cease. But, we cannot force him to stop.

Does loving the liar mean we have to act like we are not hurt?  While Jesus did not reveal that Judas was the guilty party to his disciples for a long time, He did indicate to Judas that He knew.  Note the words Jesus used: “Friend, do what you came for (Matt. 26:50); “Judas, are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss? (Luke 22:48)”; Finally, Jesus referred to Judas as his betrayer to his three friends (Mark 14:42).  Loving someone that hurts us does not mean we avoid acknowledging it, or directly tell the offender of the hurt (Matt. 18:15-17).

Remember that our primary obligation with a liar is to love them as Jesus loved us.  It can be difficult, but we are not alone as we do it.  Seeking vengeance, harboring hate or ill will, or not proactively seeking the good of his soul robs him of the life of Jesus, and it will hurt us even more.  Once we have it settled in our minds and hearts that our primary obligation in any relationship is to bless, we can move forward in doing other things to love the liar.  Check out www.sftawareness.org for wonderful tools that help assertiveness when you have been hurt.  More to come.

I really hoped he was clean this time.  I so much wanted to believe that this time when I was told, “I’m sober”, that all would be well.  I longed for the day not having to worry about relapses.  Believing that all would be well somehow made it easier to let down my guard.  After multiple lies and cover ups, it got harder to believe the sobriety claim.  I did not want to give money, or do anything else, to enable destructive behavior.  I was sick of being angry.  I did not want to feel this resentment of betrayal.  I wanted to believe my hopes would be rewarded.  I wanted to rejoice, but I did not want to be hurt again.  Each time I finally got my hopes up, the fall seemed to hurt much more.  Was there any way to love him like I did before betrayal and hurt?  Was there a way I could love him unconditionally even if he was lying to me again???

Have you ever been lied to by someone you love?  Have you lived in the same house, shared the same life, with someone you suspected was less than truthful?  Have you felt like a fool for hoping for the best, only to be rewarded with betrayal?  Jesus wanted us to forgive a brother every time he asked for it (Matthew 18:21-35).  Jesus desired forgiveness for the very ones that had him crucified (Luke 23:34).  Paul wrote of Jesus having this genuine desire for our forgiveness before we ever repented (Romans 5:6-8). Jesus knows our faults more than any others, even ourselves (Hebrews 4:13).  How was Jesus able to have such abundant love for everyone of us while we walked the dark paths of sin?

I am in awe of how Jesus loved Judas.  If there was ever a relationship that typified the type of betrayal any one of us could experience, it was that of Judas and Jesus.  Judas was in charge of the money that Jesus and the disciples used for their travels.  Judas was witness to many of the miracles of Jesus.  Judas heard multiple sermons by the Master, and witnessed Jesus’s extraordinary compassion.  However, Judas was not content with the blessings of their relationship.  He loved spending the money they had for himself.  His covetousness grew that he sought a convenient time to betray Jesus for money.  Judas was a man that cared about Jesus, but loved money even more.  Jesus gave His all for Judas.  Judas threw it all the way for money.

Jesus knew Judas was the one to betray him.  Jesus sent Judas on his way to fulfill his intentions on the evening it was to occur.  None of the other disciples assumed Judas was going to betray Jesus.  Jesus did.  Jesus loved Judas anyway.  Jesus kept Judas with the twelve.  Jesus fed Judas like He did the other disciples.  Jesus was not hateful, ugly, or cruel to Judas the whole time knowing Judas’s heart.  This kind of love is extraordinary.  Judas was a liar, and Jesus loved him more than many men could comprehend.  How could Jesus genuinely show this kind of love?  If we have an idea how Jesus could love a liar as Judas with such tenderness and care, it could help us do the same.  Thankfully, the scriptures give insight into how Jesus could love a liar.  More on that to come!

One word for 1991…”WOW”.

Take that as a positive or a negative.  Your choice

SAVED BY THE BELL was at the beach working at Malibu Sands!

The TOP 5 Songs were…

1: Bryan Adams – (Everything I Do) I Do It For You

2: Color Me Badd – I Wanna Sex You Up

3: C+C Music Factory – Gonna Make You Sweat

4: Paula Abdul – Rush Rush

5: Timmy T. — One More Try

Popular Films

Terminator 2: Judgment Day

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves

The Silence of the Lambs

Hook

The Addams Family

Sleeping with the Enemy

Father of the Bride

The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear

Beauty and the Beast

Backdraft

Beethoven

Thelma & Louise

The Top TV Shows

1. 60 Minutes (CBS)

2. Roseanne (ABC)

3. Murphy Brown (CBS)

4. Cheers (NBC)

5. Home Improvemnt (ABC)

6. Designing Women (CBS)

7. Full House (ABC)

8. Murder, She Wrote (CBS)

9. Major Dad (CBS)

10. Coach (ABC)

NEWS

Police Brutality Captured On Film in California in the case of Rodney King arrest.

Former U.S. postal worker Joseph Harris kills his former girlfriend and her fiance and two former co workers at the post office in Ridgewood, New Jersey which resulted in the phrase “going postal” .

911 Emergency Number tested in US northwestern cities.

Internet is made available to unrestricted commercial use and number of computers on the net reaches 1 million.