MLK and Niebuhr Similarities and Differences

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was and is still to this day one of our most celebrated leaders. He inspired millions of Americans to organize civil rights marches and demonstrations throughout the United States. This crusade ultimately lead to the signing of The Voter’s Rights Act, and the end of legal segregation and racial discrimination in public venues and local businesses all over the nation. He was a highly passionate social justice activist; inspired by the works of world leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi and Reinhold Niebuhr. Dr King implemented the teaching of these men into his own movement, leading the fight for justice and equal rights. It was Niebuhr, however, who Dr. King took a considerable liking to during his years at Crozer Theological Seminary. Niebuhr was a renowned American Protestant theologian and was widely influential on matters of politics and world affairs. He lived during the age of World War II and the Great Depression. These global calamities inspired Niebuhr to write a prayer. “God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference.” The prayer is now known to all as the Serenity Prayer. He is best known for his high and unwavering criticism of the dominate thinking of the theological liberalism movement of the 1920s. This intense repudiation was significant in pervading the intellectual atmosphere of the American Protestant church. His thoughts on social issues and the church impacted Dr. King’s ministry as well as his social activism. Three major similarities between these two influential and prophetic individuals are that they both believed that the complacency and high optimism of the Protestant church was faulty, that love should be at the center of Christian social interactions, and that humility is key.

Martin’s grandfather was the one who first initiated the King family's long tradition of becoming pastors and heading Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, Georgia. Beginning in 1914 Martin's grandfather headed the congregation and passed the mantel onto his father in 1931. From 1960 until his death Dr. King took over as assistant pastor. He enrolled and attended segregated public schools in Georgia and graduated from high school at fifteen. Dr. King then went on to college and it was there that he received his Bachelor of Arts degree in 1948 from Morehouse College which was a renowned African-American institution based in Atlanta, Georgia. Both his father as well as his grandfather graduated from this prestigious university. Dr. King then went on to engage in a three-year theological study at Crozer Theological Seminary in the state of Pennsylvania. He was later awarded his B.D. in 1951. With a fellowship won at Crozer, and with his studies being accomplished Dr. King decided to engage in graduate studies at Boston University which allowed him to complete his residence in 1953. This led him to finally receive and obtain his doctorate degree in 1955.

One year prior, Dr. King was installed as pastor of Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, Alabama. His longstanding and unbroken passion for civil rights enabled him to become a member of the executive committee of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. By the time of the Montgomery Bus Boycott in December of 1955 the following year Dr. King was fully prepared to lead the first African-American nonviolent demonstration which speared the Civil Rights Movement forward into renowned history.

Niebuhr was presented with the opportunity to witness the horrors and injustices caused by the American industrial revolution during his tenure as pastor in Detroit, Michigan. This contact so affected his life that it led him to enlist and become a member of the Socialist Party for a short time. Niebuhr was at one time a pacifist during the First World War, but later on during the Second World War he became much more active in trying to persuade fellow Christians to support the war against Hitler upon realizing the gravity and severity of the situation at that time. This active and vigorous campaigning for moral support during World War II led him to obtain considerable influence in the U.S. State Department.

As a highly respected theologian Reinhold Niebuhr is widely recognized for his philosophical perspective of “Christian Realism.” This philosophy greatly emphasized that evil is extremely pervasive and will inevitably always and consistently present itself as well as make known its origins in the lives of everyday human beings. Niebuhr wrote a book entitled, "Moral Man and Immoral Society" in the year 1932. Within it he made abundantly clear and wanted to greatly express as well as emphasize what he saw as the egoism, pride, and hypocrisy of nations and classes around the world. He saw these characteristics as being the product of the insecurity and anxious defensiveness of humans in their efforts to attempt to try and preserve and maintain some control over their lives upon the realization of human mortality. It was here that he believed he had discovered “original sin." He saw that the appearance of sin in every aspect of human life was indeed inevitable. It revealed itself in the form of pride in which the Bible warned comes before destruction. This was especially true and evident, Niebuhr argued, in the world of politics and religion. Human achievements were ever so susceptible to the sin of pride. Despite his strong criticisms of Protestant America’s overly optimistic outlook of world affairs and visions of utopian societies Niebuhr did believe and maintain faith that there were real and tangible possibilities for the human race as long as man did not see himself as the sole controller or creator of those possibilities.

There are numerous similarities between Martin Luther King Jr. and Reinhold Niebuhr. One of these similarities has to do with the church’s high expectations in regards to the human condition. Niebuhr lamented the fact that many Protestant churches were giving in to the theories of humanism and the ideas that man was essentially good. The church believed that if they could just somehow appeal to man’s better nature then they would then be able to have the Kingdom of Heaven realized on Earth. Niebuhr warns them of constant and countless disappointments. Man is sinful, Niebuhr reminds them, and he cannot practice justice on his own. He says that when Christians proclaim the law of God to men that it must guard against “superficial moralism” which says that man can save itself if it would set aside its selfish individualism and pride in favor of caring for ones neighbor. In other words, learn to love. Perfect love can only come from God because He is the embodiment of love. He Himself is love and as such He is the only one who can adequately teach man how to love one another. This can only come by accepting the Son and inviting and allowing His Spirit to come to dwell within in order to transform the person in which He abides as well as touch those the now Holy Spirit indwelled person comes in contact with.

Love must be the root of our thoughts, words, and actions and produce good fruit.

God is love and by following God good fruit will be produced. The opposite of love is indifference. Love cares intimately for oneself and for others. If you love yourself you will take care of your body, mind, and spirit and will do the same for others if you love them. This creates unity and a sense of community, relationship, and family. Indifference doesn't care for oneself or others and is bound for decay and disorder. This is what sin creates and is. It is essentially indifference for yourself and others.

Niebuhr reminds Christians that they reside under the law of love and that just because they see violence and destruction by men in history that does not mean that they must adopt those trends. They, as Christians, are called to a higher standard of living even while remembering their humanity. They must strive for love and perfection daily. He says that because Christians live in the world that they have a moral obligation and Christian duty to help transform the world for the better. Niebuhr tells his readers that justice is not love, but it recognizes the complexities and conflicts of life and attempts to alleviate those pains that come with it. That being the case, Niebuhr concludes that every relative justice has its subjugation under the law of love, but that it also is only an approximation. It is incumbent upon all who follow the Way of Christ and call themselves His followers to act in the world by allowing love to guide them in making impacts in history. Only the love of God can transform the world and correct its problems and heal what ails it and Niebuhr states that this is the Kingdom of God that is said to be not of this world, but is nonetheless relevant to the problems that men face today.

Dr. King speaks about the moral condition of man and the numerous attempts that have been made by the church to fix the problem. He makes similarities between the church's and the secular world's endeavor to rid society of evil by looking at the story in the book of Matthew conerning the demon possessed child immediately following the Transfiguration of Christ. The disciples attempted to cure the child, but ultimately failed and it was only after Christ came and cast out the evil spirit did the boy start to regain his health. The disciples asked why they could not accomplish the task and Jesus said that they lacked faith. They trusted their own abilities and not what God could work through them. King asserts that there are two main ways that man has attempted to eradicate evil from the face of the earth. The first relied upon man’s own power and innovation. Give people equal opportunity and advances in science and technology and ultimately man will embrace his better nature. This thinking, King says, substitutes God and the souls of humans for the world and its possibilities. While King acknowledges the great advances of science, technology, and human reason he says that the old evils of the world keep reappearing and never seem to dissipate or go away. Essentially, King asserts that you can not legislate and advance the evil hearts of men.

The second way that man has tried to eradicate evil, King says, is by standing back and thinking that God will do it in His own good time. He makes the point that the Reformation freed man morally and spiritually from an oppressive and corrupt church and led to the emphasis of justification by faith and affirmed the Priesthood of all believers. However, King states that the Reformation placed too much emphasis on man’s sins and created a mentality of total depravity and helplessness. The Renaissance was too optimistic and the Reformation ended up being too pessimistic. It forgot that we still carried the image of God. He says that if Christians have become so helpless then God becomes a servant or by relying on God to do everything then prayer becomes a substitute for hard work and intellectual thought. Man must be willing to stand up and serve and work for justice for his fellow man. As Micah tells the Israelites, what does the Lord require of you but that you seek justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with your God.

Another one of these similarities concerns their ideas about the virtue of love and its value in the life of the Christian and the rest of the world. They both hold love in high esteem. Niebuhr speaks of love when he reminds his faithful readers that Christians are in the world, but not of the world. Niebuhr elaborates when he says that the law of God is love and that man is subject to it. Dr. King says that when we speak of love that we must look at it practically and theoretically. In practical terms we learn how to love by forgiving the one who initiated or inflicted the pain on us. King reminds his hearers that forgiveness does not mean to forget. Forgiveness means reconciliation and allowing for relationships to form. He says that the amount of freedom we allow ourselves to forgive determines how much we are given the ability to love our enemies. We love also by seeing the image of God in our enemy even when it is hard and seeking for their wellbeing.

On the theoretical side King answers the question why we must love. Love is life bearing, but hate corrodes and distorts the soul. Darkness is allowed to attach itself and the vicious cycle never ends. You become a slave and it becomes detrimental to your health. Love is freeing and life sustaining. Only love can cure what ails society. By loving others, the Apostle Paul says that the faithful will heap hot coals on their enemy’s heads.

A final similarity is between Dr. King and Niebuhr is their thoughts on humility. Niebuhr used the example of the Prodigal Son in his explanation of humility. He says that the church must be careful not to become self-righteous and self-absorbed. He warns that this action will ultimately contribute to the very thing that they hope to prevent. He says that the church is just as much of a human institution as anything else and like any other human institution it is susceptible to pride and hypocrisy. He says that the church would do well to recognize and remember the wrongs which the church has committed historically and not to sweep them under the rug. Time and time again Christians have said that what it taught was just tradition. In many cases the Church has been grossly negligent in its interpretation of the Bible either because of ignorance, prejudice, or both. The Church must learn how to properly interpret Scripture, how to look at both historical and literary context, and how to read with objective eyes to ensure that they are in line with what the Scriptures are trying to convey to its readers. He warns that such a church that remains aloof will condemn itself and be like the older brother in the parable. In fact, this church may be the very reason the younger brother leaves home. He says that it is easy to confuse God’s grace and wisdom for its own. The church has great potential to become a stumbling block if it forgets its past and becomes a self-righteous slave master. The church must remain humble.

Dr. King also talks about humility. He says that without humility we cannot love our enemies. A large component of love is humility. King asserts that one cannot be humble and self-assertive. This truth goes back to the heart of love and the definition that the Bible gives on what love actually entails and means for the believer. It says,

Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. (1 Corinthians 13:4-6)

Love admits wrongdoing and takes responsibility for past wrongs and does not place its own opinions upon another thinking that it has all the answers.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Reinhold Niebuhr have established similarities on three major similarities both believing that the complacency and high optimism of the Protestant church was faulty, that love should be at the center of Christian social interactions, and that humility is key. Reliance on God was essential and King and Niebuhr reminded their readers that man cannot tackle evil and eradicate it alone, even with all of their advances in reason and innovation. Man cannot legislate the hearts of men. Only God can do that through Holy love for mankind. They both acknowledge that social justice is beneficial and helps others to see the Kingdom, though Niebuhr may have looked more into man’s depravity and brokenness than King did. Love was always and above all the core foundation of their efforts. Without love nothing nothing can be accomplished to its full potential and intended purposes. They talked about learning to stay humble, admiting the wrongs that one has committed, and not allowing oneself to become self-assertive or self-righteous. King and Niebuhr were prophetic and insightful individuals who took on the issues of their day and were not afraid of the pushback and backlash that they would receive because of their convictions. Their words of wisdom and spiritual insight continue to influence and inspire the many faithful followers of Christ to this very day.

References:

Blake, John. "How Obama's Favorite Theologian Shaped His First Year in Office." CNN. 2010. Accessed December 14, 2016. http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/02/05/Obama.theologian/

King, Martin Luther. Strength to Love. New York: Harper & Row, 1963.

Niebuhr, Reinhold, and Robert McAfee Brown. The Essential Reinhold Niebuhr: Selected Essays and Addresses. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986.

"Martin Luther King Jr." Martin Luther King Jr. - Biography. Accessed December 13, 2016. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1964/king-bio.html.

Reinhold Niebuhr." Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Accessed December 13, 2016. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Reinhold-Niebuhr.