ROANOKE TIMES 

                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: THURSDAY, October 19, 1995                   TAG: 9510190010
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A-11   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: CAL THOMAS
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

MILLION MAN MARCH

FEW PEOPLE disagreed with the stated objectives of the Million Man March of black men on Washington. Given the deplorable state of the black family, not many could oppose black men ``repenting and atoning for sin,'' as organizers put it. If it was nothing else - and it was much else - the sight of so many black males making vows to God, to themselves and to each other (if that's what they did), was an encouraging sight.

But those who said it was not significant that Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan was leading the march might be asked whether they would think a march of white people led by a current or former member of the Ku Klux Klan, such as David Duke, would not matter, so long as the objectives were noble. It would matter a great deal, because people would rightly suspect there was a hidden motive behind such a march.

God knows there is a vacuum of leadership in the African-American community. There is no dearth of self-appointed spokesmen who frequently run their mouths for the television cameras but who personally do little to improve the lot of black Americans and who think true redemption is to be found in Washington and its supposed ``power'' structures.But Farrakhan is not the way. He is certainly not the truth. And his is not the life African-Americans should emulate. Any person who would say what he has said about Jews, about whites and even about blacks who disagree with him is not fit to lead a movement that claims transcendent authority for its existence.

How different this march was from two other mass events to which some have compared it. In 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. led a march on Washington with three specific legislative goals: the opening of public accommodations to all, the passage of a voting rights act, and equal employment opportunity. More recently, a movement called ``Promise Keepers,'' has brought hundreds of thousands of men to sports stadiums across America, encouraging them to reconnect with God and recommit to their families.

E.V. Hill, pastor of Mount Zion Church in Los Angeles, helped plan the 1963 march and has spoken at several of the Promise Keepers events on ``Raising the Standard in Our Personal Life.'' Of the Million Man March, Hill tells me he is amazed at how many said they had never before heard what Farrakhan has been saying about unity and personal responsibility.

``His message is not unique,'' says Hill. ``It is insulting to the pulpits of the land to suggest we haven't been saying that. Small storefront churches have been saying this for years.''

The difference between Farrakhan's march and Promise Keepers, says Hill, is that ``Promise Keepers is Christo-centric. It invites every man, no matter his color or creed, to come. Farrakhan's march invited only the black man. It was an ethnic march.'' It was also Washington-centric. While Promise Keepers reflects a Christian world view, it has been praised by the prominent Jewish writer Irving Kristol. In a Wall Street Journal column, Times of Transformation, Kristol suggested that the sight of thousands of men committing to God and to their families is a sign that ``something is going on out there, and attention must be paid.'' Neither Kristol nor any responsible Jewish or Christian leader has praised Farrakhan's march. The big media are responsible for elevating Farrakhan. They have ignored responsible black leadership. Real black leaders, who serve large congregations of people, like Hill and Tony Evans of Dallas (another Promise Keepers speaker), are often ignored and treated as irrelevant to the debate over race, culture and reconciliation.

If the Farrakhan marchers want to bring real change, they should march, as David Brinkley suggested last Sunday, on rat-infested public housing and ``other places of evil.'' That they chose Washington is an indication that Farrakhan's ultimate purpose is political, and politics never touches the heart, much less the soul.

- Los Angeles Times Syndicate 


 by CNB