Page: 6

The Question of Segregation

Bull and Lockhart maintain that Adventists were generally passive and accommodating in regard to racial issues. They concede that while Adventists may not have endorsed segregation, they did accept it as a part of life in the South. They argue that racial segregation in the Adventist Church was initiated and perpetuated "first by expediency, and then by choice." There is, however, another perspective.

The Adventist Church did address the issue of segregation in this pre-1891 period. Adventist ministers in the South encountered a perplexing dilemma when Blacks attended their evangelistic meetings and churches. The burning question was "What should we do?" A. W. Spalding, in his unpublished manuscript "Lights and Shades in the Black Belt," avers that seeking to integrate churches would have hindered the work in the South. He goes on to say, "The matter [of segregation] did not come prominently to the attention of the denomination, because it was in only two or three places that the difficulties were acute, and the cause in the South was not extensive enough in those years to rake over much of the time of the annual conferences" (p. 138).

The segregation issue did not appear in the records of the church until 1887. Entries in the General Conference Bulletin cite that the delegates had engaged in animated discussion on a resolution that the church recognize no color line. The discussion resulted in an amended resolution that stressed that "no distinction whatever" should be "made between the two races in church relations." In addition, the session established a three-person committee to "consider the matter carefully, and recommend proper action to the conference." A week later the committee reported that they saw "no occasion for this conference to legislate upon the subject, and would, therefore, recommend that no action be taken." This left the question to the discretion of individual ministers and teachers.

After the 1887 segregation issue, items having to do with the South and the Black work receded into the background. It took Ellen White's 1891 message to cause the church to face its unavoidable responsibility relative to work among Black people.

There is a temptation for those who look back in history to accuse, blame, or reside in the speculative realm of "what should have been" and "what could have been." Perhaps the most important lesson is to learn from our past. Today the church once again has windows of opportunity: in the United Sates, the former Soviet Union, Africa, South America, and numerous other places around the globe. The question is: How will we respond?

Next