The following
reflection was written and shared by Dr. Emily Reimer-Barry, Associate
Professor of Christian Ethics and Chair, Department of Theology and Religious
Studies
Martin Luther
King, Jr. (1929-1968) was pastor of Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery,
Alabama when he prepared a sermon entitled “A Tough Mind and a Tender Heart,”
which opens his published collection of early sermons Strength to
Love. It is remarkable how the message of that sermon is as relevant
today as it was in 1955. While King was strategizing with community leaders
then and implementing the bus boycott, he was preparing his congregation for
long term commitments to social justice work and resistance to unjust
segregation laws.
In “A Tough
Mind and a Tender Heart,” King explains to his congregation that followers of
Jesus must face “a difficult and hostile world.” In that world, Christians must
be both tough and tender.
What does
he mean by “tough”? King begins by explaining the need for critical thinking. A
Christian must have a tough mind, characterized by “incisive thinking,
realistic appraisal, and decisive judgment.” But it is difficult work to
cultivate critical thinking. “There is an almost universal quest for easy
answers and half-baked solutions. Nothing pains some people more than having to
think,” says King. He calls this “gullibility” and “soft-mindedness.” The
soft-minded person accepts what they read in the newspapers without thinking
critically about the agenda of the author. The soft-minded person believes
marketing messages that tell you you will be happier if you buy their product.
The soft-minded person believes in superstitions. The soft-minded person fears
change. The soft-minded person is a sheep following the whims of a dictator
without raising questions. King quotes Mein Kampf: “By means of shrewd lies,
unremittingly repeated, it is possible to make people believe that heaven is
hell—and hell, heaven… The greater the lie, the more readily will it be
believed.”
So too with
white politicians who fed on racial prejudice of soft-minded constituents:
“With insidious zeal, they make inflammatory statements and disseminate
distortions and half-truths that arouse abnormal fears and morbid antipathies
within the minds of uneducated and underprivileged whites, leaving them so
confused that they are led to acts of meanness and violence that no normal
person commits.”
King argues
that Christians must reject soft-mindedness. “The shape of the world today does
not permit us the luxury of soft-mindedness. A nation or a civilization that
continues to produce soft-minded men purchases its own spiritual death on an
installment plan.”
King’s
critique of the complacency of privileged elites in his own day and his rebuke
of soft-minded Christians who want “easy answers” to complex problems is as
important today as it was in 1955. Meanwhile, powerful corporations and news
agencies continue to distort the truth and manipulate readers. The playbook of
Breitbart News aligns exactly with what King describes as “inflammatory
statements” and “distortions and half-truths that arouse abnormal fears” for
readers. Seeking the truth is a radical act of citizenship in our present
context.
But King’s
sermons also provide hope and encourage the practice of changemaking.
Christians need not only have a “tough mind,” but also a “tender heart.” This
means appreciating the beauty of friendship, being moved by the suffering of
another person, and rejecting hardheartedness. “The hardhearted individual
never sees people as people, but rather as mere objects or as impersonal cogs
in an ever-turning wheel… He depersonalizes life.” King tells his congregation
that they need to be both tough minded and tender hearted in order to “move
creatively toward the goal of freedom and justice.”
“Soft-minded
individuals among us feel that the only way to deal with oppressing is by
adjusting to it. They acquiesce and resign themselves to segregation.” King
describes this approach as cowardly. But he also rejects a hardhearted approach
that seeks physical violence rooted in corroding hatred. Violence only begets
more violence, King explains. Rather, what is needed is a combination of
toughmindedness and tenderheartedness, a combination of justice and love.
In this, as
in other sermons, King demonstrates his enduring legacy: his rebuke of unjust
social structures combined thoughtful social analysis with theological acumen
and hope rooted in the good news of the gospel. He does not provide an easy way
out for contemporary readers, but we can follow his methods by applying the
same skills of critical analysis and practical realism to our assessment of
structural sins today. That deep dive into the data of poverty, racial
injustice, sexism, heteropatriarchy, militarism, and political corruption can
lead one to inner turmoil. “I’m so small. What can I possibly do to make the
world a better place? I’m just one person.” But King’s message is also one of
encouragement. Find a community of people with your shared values and
commitments, read critically, reflect on your choices and your values, and take
things one step at a time. King didn’t deliver the Montgomery bus boycott on
his own. He worked in collaboration with many people who had a shared vision of
a more just world. And your changemaking efforts today can follow in his
footsteps.
Students in
my THRS 231 Christian Changemakers intersession class recently had the
opportunity to walk the MLK Promenade in San Diego, discuss the sculpture
“Breaking of the Chains” by Melvin Edwards, and reflect on King’s enduring
legacy for changemakers today. We hope you enjoy these pictures and some of our
favorite quotations from that walk. If you are interested in joining a
community of people who want to make the world a better place, join us at the
Changemaker Hub!
“As long as
there is poverty in the world I can never be rich… As long as diseases are
rampant… I can never be totally healthy… I can never be what I ought to be
until you are what you ought to be.”
“The
question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists will
we be. Will we be extremists for hate or for love? Will we be extremists for
the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice?”
