Since yesterday was Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, I watched
the movie Selma last night and was
struck with a strong sense of pride. During a moment of intense struggle
between whites and blacks in the South, Greek Orthodox Archbishop IAKOVOS
participated in the March on Selma. His involvement was depicted also in the
movie. My personal pride peaked while I watched the scene which depicted a
brief dialogue between MLK and IAKOVOS.
MLK: “You came!” (smiling and embracing)
IAKOVOS: “You called, and I came.”
What struck my pride was that this was the ONLY interaction
between MLK and other religious leaders that the movie chose to depict. I have
no idea what other interactions MLK had with national religious leaders that
day, but I was quite proud that the movie’s director felt strong enough sense
to include the brief interaction. There are many possible reasons for the
director’s choice, but I don’t want to dwell on that. Instead, I want to consider
the role pride plays in how I watched the movie last night, and how Greek
Orthodox Christians react to the, now famous march and presence of IAKOVOS on
the cover of Life Magazine, story.
At the time, many Greeks were very upset at the decision of the
Archbishop to participate in the march. Several of his advisors at the time
advised the Archbishop not to participate, but he insisted. Following the
march, many Greeks turned against the Archbishop and several protests took
place among southern Greek communities.
Fast forward to 2016 and almost every Greek publicly
announces that OUR ARCHBISHOP marched with MLK, with puffed up chests and
pride. Admittedly, I doubt most people who speak proudly today were active in
the Church fifty years ago, but what changed? Is the pride I felt last night
based upon the same aspect of pride for those who boast today, 50 years later?
I must admit my pride was based upon the director’s choice to include what
otherwise would have been insignificant piece of film that would have not
affected the movie in any way if it ended up on the cutting room floor. My
pride seemed to be generated by the presumption, on my part, that the director recognized
the value of the original interaction, if it actually historically occurred in
the first place. My Archbishop was bold enough to stand up to his own advisors
and many within the Church for the truth of the Church – all people should be
treated with dignity. I was thankful for his boldness.
But what causes a population to
protest against their archbishop one year, and then fifty years later with
pride proclaim how proud they are of their archbishop. The only difference
between today and fifty years ago is the public perspective on the situation. So
long as other Americans were protesting the march, the Greeks felt pressure to
protest as well. They felt they could not risk gaining the reputation of being
pro-black in the South. I can’t ignore that organizations such as the KKK
burned crosses in many front yards, not just black front yards, and many of
those yards were Greek! The 1920’s must
have been fresh in the mind of Greeks who had only recently (by the 1960’s)
raised their own stature among America’s elite white class. Today with very few
exceptions, the March on Selma is considered an important turning point in race
relations. Now from the comfort of social acceptance many Greeks find
themselves able to show pride in their Archbishop.
One thing still sits uneasy in my
mind....is the pride of today and the protest of yesterday the same issue? Are
we just trying to stay with the majority in an attempt to be seen as normal?
Are we simply not willing to stand up for what is right, whether or not the
elite white class agree? What do we really have pride in; the boldness of an
archbishop or the acceptance of the elite? Pride can be a dangerous thing.
No comments:
Post a Comment